Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022/11/01 Post Agenda Packet REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL **POST AGENDA** Date:Tuesday, November 1, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Location:Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA View the Meeting Live in English & Spanish: chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings Cox channel 24 in English only Welcome to your City Council Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comments may be submitted to the City Council in the following ways: In-Person. The community is welcome to make public comments at this City Council meeting. Masks or face coverings are recommended in Council Chambers and all City conference and meeting rooms. • Submit an eComment: Visit www.chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings, locate the meeting and click the comment bubble icon. Select the item and click "Leave Comment." eComments can be submitted until the conclusion of public comments for the item and are viewable online upon submittal. If you have difficulty submitting eComments, email comments to: cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov. • HOW TO WATCH: Live stream is available at www.chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings. To switch the video to Spanish, please click on "ES" in the bottom right hand corner. Meetings are available anytime on the City's website (English and Spanish). ACCESSIBILITY: Individuals with disabilities or special needs are invited to request modifications or accommodations to access and/or participate in a City meeting by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov or (619) 691-5041 (California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting. SPEAKER TIME LIMITS: The time allotted for speakers may be adjusted by the Mayor. - Five minutes* for specific items listed on the agenda - Three minutes* for items NOT on the agenda (called to speak during Public Comments) - A group of individuals may select a spokesperson to speak on their behalf on an agenda item, waiving their option to speak individually on the same item. Generally, five minutes are allotted per person, up to a limit of 30 minutes, although the limits may be adjusted. Members of the group must be present. *Individuals who use a translator will be allotted twice the amount of time. GETTING TO KNOW YOUR AGENDA Agenda Sections: CONSENT CALENDAR items are routine items that are not expected to prompt discussion. All items are considered for approval at the same time with one vote. Councilmembers and staff may request items be removed and members of the public may submit a speaker slip if they wish to comment on an item. Items removed from the Consent Calendar are discussed after the vote on the remaining Consent Calendar items. PUBLIC COMMENT provides the public with an opportunity to address the Council on any matter not listed on the agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the Council. In compliance with the Brown Act, the Council cannot take action on matters not listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS are held on matters specifically required by law. The Mayor opens the public hearing and asks for presentations from staff and from the proponent or applicant involved (if applicable) in the matter under discussion. Following questions from the Councilmembers, the Mayor opens the public hearing and asks for public comments. The hearing is closed, and the City Council may discuss and take action. ACTION ITEMS are items that are expected to cause discussion and/or action by the Council but do not legally require a Public Hearing. Staff may make a presentation and Councilmembers may ask questions of staff and the involved parties before the Mayor invites the public to provide input. CLOSED SESSION may only be attended by members of the Council, support staff, and/or legal counsel. The most common purpose of a Closed Session is to avoid revealing confidential information that may prejudice the legal or negotiating position of the City or compromise the privacy interests of employees. Closed sessions may be held only as specifically authorized by law. Council Actions: RESOLUTIONS are formal expressions of opinion or intention of the Council and are usually effective immediately. ORDINANCES are laws adopted by the Council. Ordinances usually amend, repeal or supplement the Municipal Code; provide zoning specifications; or appropriate money for specific purposes. Most ordinances require two hearings: an introductory hearing, generally followed by a second hearing at the next regular meeting. Most ordinances go into effect 30 days after the final approval. PROCLAMATIONS are issued by the City to honor significant achievements by community members, highlight an event, promote awareness of community issues, and recognize City employees. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 2 of 810 Pages 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE 4.SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 4.1.Update from Chief Harry Muns on the Fire Prevention Week Open House, Hurricane Ian Deployment, and Christmas in October 8 4.2.Presentation of a Proclamation to Senator Ben Hueso for His Service in the State Legislature 5.CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5.1 through 5.7) All items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered and acted upon by one motion. Anyone may request an item be removed for separate consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION: To approve the recommended actions appearing below consent calendar Items 5.1 through 5.2, and 5.4 through 5.6. The headings were read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: 5.1.Waive Reading of Text of Resolutions and Ordinances RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a motion to read only the title and waive the reading of the text of all resolutions and ordinances at this meeting. 5.2.Consideration of Requests for Excused Absences RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consideration of requests for excused absence. No requests were received at that meeting. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 5.3.Tenant Protections: Adopt an Ordinance Regarding Local Tenant Protections to Address No-Fault Just Cause Terminations of Tenancy and Harassment (Second Reading) 22 Report Number: 22-0185 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: To adopt Ordinance No. 3527, heading read, text waived. The motion was carried by the following vote: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 3 of 810 5.4.Grant Award, Appropriation, and Purchase: Accept and Appropriate Grant Funds From Cal OES for a High-Frequency Communications Equipment Program and Authorize the Purchase of Radio Equipment 118 Report Number: 22-0277 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Fire Environmental Notice: The Project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15303 class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution accepting $55,764 in grant funds from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), appropriating the funds to the supplies and services category of the Fire Grants Section of the State Grants Fund for a high-frequency communications equipment program, and authorizing the purchase of radio equipment. (4/5 Vote Required) 5.5.Grant Award and Appropriation: Accept Grant Funds from UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine for Shelter Services 134 Report Number: 22-0296 Location: 130 Beyer Way Department: Animal Care Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution accepting $53,000 from UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine on behalf of its Shelter Medicine Program and appropriating funds to the Supplies & Services and Other expense categories in the Other Grant Funds for that purpose. (4/5 Vote Required) 5.6.Financial Report and Appropriation: Accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the Quarter Ending June 30, 2022, and Appropriate Funds for that Purpose 137 Report Number: 22-0275 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Finance Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 4 of 810 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the quarterly financial report for the quarter ended June 30, 2022 and adopt a resolution making various amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021/22 budget to adjust for variances and appropriating funds for that purpose. (4/5 Vote Required) 5.7.Annexation: Support a Property Owner Application to the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission for Annexation of Otay Ranch Village 13 from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista 152 Report Number: 22-0287 Location: Otay Ranch Village 13 Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution supporting an application submitted by the property owners, Lakeview 1 LLC and Lakeview 2 LLC, c/o Baldwin and Sons and Moller Otay Lakes Investments, LLC, to the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) requesting annexation of the 1,869-acre territory, known as Otay Ranch Village 13, from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista. 6.PUBLIC COMMENTS 171 The public may address the Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council but not on the agenda. 7.BOARD AND COMMISSION REPORTS The following item(s) have been brought forward by a City board, commission, or committee. 7.1.Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force Presentation: Recommendations to City Council and Taking Certain Actions Regarding Columbus Statue, Discovery Park and Proposed Framework 178 Location: Discovery Park, 700 Buena Vista Way Department: Administration Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 5 of 810 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force recommends that City Council develop a policy for the Installation, Removal, and Disposition of Monuments and Naming and Renaming City Assets; consider proposals to rename Discovery Park; and consider proposals for marker language to former site of Columbus Statue. City Council may take alternative action(s) as deemed appropriate. 8.ACTION ITEMS The following item(s) will be considered individually and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. 8.1.Privacy and Technology: Citywide Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 247 Report Number: 22-0280 Location: No specific geographic location Department: City Manager Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution approving a Citywide Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy. 9.CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS 10.MAYOR’S REPORTS 11.COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS 11.1.Councilmember Galvez: Ratification of Appointment of Lea Cruz to the Measure A Citizens' Oversight Committee (District 2 Representative) 806 12.CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 6 of 810 13.ADJOURNMENT to the regular City Council meeting on November 8, 2022, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Materials provided to the City Council related to an open session item on this agenda are available for public review, please contact the Office of the City Clerk at cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov or (619) 691-5041. Sign up at www.chulavistaca.gov to receive email notifications when City Council agendas are published online. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 7 of 810 Chula Vista Fire Department Recent Activities 2022 Fire Safety Week & Open House 2022 Christmas in October National Responses 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 8 of 810 2022 Fire Safety Week & Open House •First in-person event is over three years. •More than 2,000 in attendance. •City-Wide Event: •Conservation •Library •Parks •Police •Recreation 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 9 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 10 of 810 2022 Christmas in October •First event since 2019. •More than 50 volunteers in attendance. •City-Wide Event: •Fire Department •Police Department •Collins Aerospace 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 11 of 810 2022 Christmas in October 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 12 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 13 of 810 FEMA US&R Hurricane Ian Response •FEMA US&R System •CA-TF8 •National Disasters •Acts of Terrorism •Earthquakes •Floods •Hurricanes •Mudslides •Structural Collapse •Tornadoes •Approximately 20 Chula Vista Fire Department Members 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 14 of 810 Hurricane Ian 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 15 of 810 Ft. Meyers Beach 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 16 of 810 Ft. Meyers Beach 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 17 of 810 Ft. Meyers Beach 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 18 of 810 Sanibel & Pine Island(s) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 19 of 810 Sanibel & Pine Island(s) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 20 of 810 Questions? Thank you for your support! 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 21 of 810 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 October 25, 2022 ITEM TITLE Tenant Protections: Consideration of an Ordinance Regarding Local Tenant Protections to Address No- Fault Just Cause Terminations of Tenancy and Harassment Report Number: 22-0185 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Consider placing an ordinance on first reading to add Chapter 9.65 to the Chula Vista Municipal Code entitled “Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance.” (First Reading) SUMMARY On May 17, 2022, staff presented an ordinance responsive to a September 14, 2021 City Council referral to review potential tenant protections in the City of Chula Vista and received feedback. Tonight’s action provides the City Council with a permanent ordinance, Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 9.65 “Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance” (“CVMC 9.65” or the “Ordinance”), that is responsive to the original referral and subsequent Council comments to address no-fault terminations of tenancy related to substantial remodels of rental properties, removal of rental properties from the rental market, demolition of rental properties, and owner or family move-ins. The provisions further define and prohibit harassment and retaliation against tenants and provide remedies and tools for enforcement. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with CEQA. The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the proposal consists of a reporting action, is not for a site-specific project(s) and will not result in a direct or indirect 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 22 of 810 P a g e | 2 physical change in the environmental. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION On April 19, 2022, the Housing Advisory Commission (“HAC”) voted 4-1 recommending the draft ordinance to add CVMC 9.65 advance to City Council and that the City establish a task force to assist in tenant and landlord disputes. The Commission also expressed some difficulty in moving forward with the ordinance, indicating that they felt additional outreach might bring the stakeholders into closer agreement. DISCUSSION On September 14, 2021, after several months of public comments regarding the eviction of tenants at two properties within the City of Chula Vista, and requests for action by the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), the City Council made a referral to staff to review and address the following key areas of tenant protection law:  Substantial Rehabilitation  Removal from Rental Market  Harassment and Retaliation  City Remedies & Enforcement On April 12, 2022, an extensive update was provided to City Council on the process established to respond to the September 14, 2021 referral as Item No. 8.1. This was followed by a presentation of a proposed ordinance on May 17 as Item No. 7.2. Tonight’s report serves to respond to specific concerns voiced at the May 17 meeting, provide an update of meetings with stakeholders since that time, and present the City Council with a responsive ordinance inclusive of final stakeholder input and additional data. Exhibit 1 provides a timeline of the referral process. Exhibit 1 Tenant Protection Referral Timeline 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 23 of 810 P a g e | 3 Legal Considerations Three main State Laws currently provide tenant protections related to the referred items. A summary of each, and the City’s authority to implement local protections is summarized below. The Ellis Act (Government Code section 7060, et seq.): The Ellis Act provides that a local jurisdiction may not compel a rental property owner via statute, ordinance, regulation, or administrative action to continue to offer accommodations for rent. In other words, the City may not prevent a landlord from exiting the rental business. The Ellis Act does, however, permit all local jurisdictions to mitigate any adverse impacts on persons displaced as a result of the withdrawal of a property from the rental market (see Government Code section 7060.1(c)). In jurisdictions that have adopted local rent control measures, specific additional protective provisions are authorized by statute. If a local jurisdiction implements local rent control measures, additional tenant protections could be available under the Ellis Act; however, it would be the local jurisdiction’s responsibility to implement and enforce rent control, as well as any adopted additional protections. The State’s Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (“STPA”) (AB1482): The STPA in Civil Code section 1946.2 provides that a tenancy may only be terminated for Just Cause, which includes both At-Fault Just Cause and No-Fault Just Cause terminations. At-Fault Just Cause reasons for terminating a tenancy include actions by the tenants that justify termination of the tenancy. No-Fault Just Cause reasons for terminating a tenancy include situations in which the tenant is not at fault, and the termination is instead being initiated because of the landlord’s actions. The STPA, in reference to the Ellis Act provisions, lists removal of a rental property from the rental market as a No-Fault Just Cause basis. (see Civil Code section 1946.2(b)(2)(B)). Additional No Fault Just Cause reasons for terminating a tenancy include: (1) owner or family member move-in; (2) substantial remodel or complete demolition of the rental property; and (3) a court order or other law forcing the closure of the rental property. In addition to requiring At Fault or No-Fault Just Cause to terminating a tenancy, the STPA further provides for various tenant protections, including reason-specific termination notices and relocation assistance. Most importantly, the STPA allows local jurisdictions to create their own ordinances to provide for greater tenant protections. In instances where a local jurisdiction enacts an ordinance that is more protective than the STPA provisions, the local protections supersede the STPA. Finally, Civil Code section 1947.12 imposes state-wide rent control, capping the number of times per year that rent can be increased, and capping the percentage of such increases. Section 1947.12 does not limit local jurisdictions from establishing their own local rent control provisions. In reviewing the options for the Ordinance, rent control was not considered as it was not part of the referral made to staff. Retaliatory Behavior Prohibition (Civil Code 1942.5): State law provides protections from retaliation for tenants that have exercised a legal right against a landlord. In the event that a tenant exercises a tenant’s right (including participation in an organized tenant’s rights association) or reports a habitability issue to an enforcing agency, a landlord cannot terminate the tenancy, force the tenant to leave involuntarily, increase rent, or decrease any services for a specified period of time so long as the tenant has not failed to pay rent. Local jurisdictions may adopt additional tenant anti- harassment provisions pursuant to their local police power authority. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 24 of 810 P a g e | 4 Council Comments Table 1 provides a summary of comments from City Council on May 17 and provides details of how City staff have addressed these concerns. Table 1 Summary of Council Comments on May 17th & Action to Address May 17th Comment Action to Address Assessment of Housing Staff Resources A separate action will be brought forward to Council regarding Housing resources and restructuring to address increasing emphasis on Housing matters. Develop Outreach Plan City entered into a contract with NV5/Ardurra in June 2022 for assistance in facilitating stakeholder meetings, inventorying available stakeholder resources and developing an outreach strategy for initial ordinance implementation and a long-term educational campaign. An outline of the collaborative stakeholder outreach opportunities is provided later in the staff report. Tracking/Data Collection Added Ordinance requirements for landlords to provide data to be submitted to the City along with notice(s) served to resident(s), to be more fully defined in the Administrative Regulations. City staff will maintain no- fault noticing and work with CSA to establish data collection for other tenant/landlord issues and terminations. How Would Tenancy be Validated? Ordinance provides definitions on qualifications for tenancy and tools for tenants to civilly pursue. Length of Tenancy for Protections Removed the requirement that Just Cause is required only for Long-Term Tenancies. As a result, Just Cause is required to terminate a tenancy of any length. Review Relocation Metric of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Small Area Fair Market Rent (SAFMR) to Ensure it Reflects Current Rental Market The SAFMR is updated in April of every year. While the City has seen a significant increase in rental rates in the past year, historically the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase for the San Diego area averages 2.5-3.0% annually. A survey, further discussed below was conducted in July 2022 and showed average rents well below the SAFMR. However, to address concerns regarding increased market rents, the Ordinance has been updated to provide relocation assistance for a specified number of months at the greater of the SAFMR for that zip code or actual contracted rent. Strengthen Protections around First Right of Refusal Added requirement for landlord to include minimum criteria for requalification of tenancy with first right of refusal noticing and greater specificity of timeframes. Clarify Enforcement of Criminal Offenses Ordinance updated to specify that criminal penalties are authorized only in the case of the Owner’s interference with a Tenant’s occupancy involving (a) threat, fraud, intimidation, etc.; (b) a public nuisance; (c) cutting off utilities; or restricting trade (including delivery services) to or from a Tenant. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 25 of 810 P a g e | 5 Address Enforcement Process and Define Remedies Administrative Regulations will provide additional details for enforcement. Citywide Survey Based on continuing concern that additional local data was needed surrounding the types of termination of tenancies that have recently occurred, types of properties impacted, and existing rental rates, Staff contracted with LUTH Research to conduct a survey of tenants and landlords throughout the City (see Attachment 1 for the full report). Between July 6 and July 26, through market research calls, stakeholders and city media channels, a citywide survey was distributed to collect additional data and responses were received from 271 tenants and 89 landlords who lease out 116 separate units. The survey highlights included:  41% of tenant respondents resided in the 91910 zip code, followed by 91911 at 26%, 91913 at 17%, 91915 at 8%, 91902 at 5%, and 91914 at 2%.  Only one in ten tenant respondents are renting a property that the owner also lives on.  One in five tenant respondents have been in the property ten years or longer.  Nearly one-half of tenant respondents are renting two-bedroom units and one in three are renting three-bedroom units.  The average rent paid for a 1-bedroom rental in Chula Vista is just under $1,500, it is just under $2,000 for a 2-bedroom and nearly $2,400 for a 3-bedroom rental. Exhibit 2 provides a comparison of these results to the SAFMR, showing on average the SAFMR is higher than reported rents.  41% of tenant respondents received a rent increase for 2022, while one in three tenant respondents have never had a rent increase.  Rent increases averaged $180 in 2022.  One in ten Chula Vista tenant respondents say they have received an eviction notice or a termination of tenancy in the past three months.  The primary reason for an eviction notice is for non-payment of rent; however, many have also received notices due to the owner or family moving in and substantial rehabilitation.  Around one in ten tenants belong to ACCE and slightly fewer belong to San Diego Tenants Unite/Tenants Together.  Landlords reported issuing no-fault terminations in the past 3 months affecting 157 tenants.  35% of landlords indicated they were not aware of noticing requirements under AB1482. Exhibit 2 Comparison of Survey Data vs. SAFMR 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 26 of 810 P a g e | 6 Stakeholder Outreach The May 17 staff report provides a full update of stakeholder input to that point. In all, over 20 stakeholder and/or public meetings, as summarized in Table 2, have been held over the course of responding to the referral. Meeting notes from stakeholder meetings on June 2, July 13, and August 22 have been included as Attachment 2. Table 2 Summary of Outreach Meetings & Stakeholder Involvement While staff has continued to make updates to the Ordinance based on stakeholder input throughout the process, landlords have contended from the beginning that local protections beyond those offered by State Law should not be implemented since the State Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (“AB1482” or the “STPA”) was adopted just prior to the pandemic making the real industry impacts still unknown, and there has not been a demonstrated need for additional protections in Chula Vista. On the other hand, tenant advocates have contended that no-fault evictions are a loophole in AB1482, are a growing trend for displacement of residents throughout the State, and local jurisdictions should act now before the issue grows further. “Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance” Based upon the May 17 input received from the Council and subsequent data and stakeholder input, a final Ordinance is being presented for consideration. Attachment 3 provides an overview of State Law surrounding substantial remodel, demolition, removal from market, and retaliatory harassment (AB1482, Civil Code 1942.5, and Ellis Act), in comparison to the proposed Ordinance. Important points of the new ordinance include:  For single-family residences, only those owned by a business entity have greater requirements than current State law.  Section 9.65.050, Harassment and Retaliation Against Tenant Prohibited, applies to single-family residences that are owned by a business entity, properties with two units that are both rented (duplexes or single-family with ADU), and Residential Rental Complexes.  Section 9.65.060, Just Cause Required for Termination of Tenancy, applies to all single-family residences that are owned by a business entity, properties with two units that are both rented (duplexes or single-family with ADU), and to Residential Rental Complex with 3 units or more. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 27 of 810 P a g e | 7  Section 9.65.070, Requirements Upon Termination of a Tenancy, requires that notice and relocation assistance be provided to tenants in the event of a No-Fault Just Cause termination. This provision applies to all single-family residences that are owned by a business entity, properties with two units that are both rented (duplexes or single-family with ADU), and to Residential Rental Complex with 3 units or more. Owners are required to provide notice to the City of the No Fault J ust Cause termination of tenancy. For units in a Residential Rental Complex, relocation assistance must be provided to the tenant in an amount equal to two months’ rent, or for elderly or disabled tenants, an amount equal to three months’ rent. For all other units, relocation assistance must be provided to the tenant in an amount equal to one month’s rent. Implementation Should Council adopt the Ordinance as presented, the effective date would be March 1, 2023. Over the next approximately 90 days, staff would continue to work with stakeholders to finalize the Administrative Regulations and provide educational outreach to all affected parties. A summary of potential methods was compiled with stakeholder input and is provided in Attachment 4. Specifically, City staff will be launching an updated webpage dedicated to landlord/tenant resources (https://www.chulavistaca.gov/landlordtenant), will provide direct mailing and utilize social media and community organizations to educate the community. Currently, 752 complexes which contain 3 units or more (“Residential Rental Complex” as defined in the Ordinance), a total of 22,905 units, have business licenses to operate. Staff will coordinate with the Finance Department and Code Enforcement to ensure information on the Ordinance is included in future annual business license renewal mailings; separate mailings will be made as needed, and emails will be sent to all Residential Rental Complexes on file. CSA San Diego will increase education to tenants through community events and community-based organizations and will collect additional data on terminations of tenancy, that are not covered by the Ordinance and being collected by the City, in order to track trends and inform future policy. Conclusion Staff has held over twenty (20) stakeholder meetings throughout the ordinance development process, including three public meetings through the Housing Advisory Commission, in addition to the City Council meetings on April 12 and May 17. The goal has continually been to bring forward a draft ordinance to be responsive to the original City Council referral to address no-fault termination of tenancy related to substantial remodel, removal from rental market, harassment/retaliation, and City remedies and enforcement. While stakeholders still widely disagree on several key elements, the Ordinance as presented provides tools to clarify state law and additional protections for Chula Vista tenants while balancing other stakeholder and City resource concerns. Considerations in this process have included:  Providing residents with additional protections for no-fault termination of tenancy;  Minimally impacting small landlords (“mom and pops”);  Narrowing the definition of what constitutes a substantial remodel;  Allowing properties within the city to revitalize as needed due to age, while providing resources for tenants to be able to move to a similar unit with additional relocation benefits;  Limiting additional city resource needs; and 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 28 of 810 P a g e | 8  Addressing unintentional impacts throughout the process. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not a site- specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §87100, et seq.). Councilmember McCann may, however, have a conflict of interest given his ownership interest in rental property and property management business. Otherwise, Staff is not independently aware, and has not been informed by any other City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT There is no current year fiscal impact to the General Fund as a result of this action. Costs associated with development of this staff report and ordinance are included in the Housing Authority budget. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact to the General Fund as a result of this action as currently presented. Implementation of the Ordinance will have minor indirect costs for staff time to collect data, respond to and educate residents, particularly in the first months and/or year of implementation. Staff will continue to evaluate impacts and provide the HAC with updates related to administrative changes and/or budgetary impacts. ATTACHMENTS 1. LUTH Research Citywide Landlord & Tenant Survey 2. Stakeholder Meeting Notes from June 2, July 13, and August 22 3. Comparison of State Law & Proposed Local Protections 4. Summary of Collaborative Stakeholder Outreach Opportunities Staff Contact: Stacey Kurz, Housing Manager Laura Black, Director of Development Services 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 29 of 810 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING CHAPTER 9.65 TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH RESIDENTIAL TENANT PROTECTIONS WHEREAS, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, there existed a lack of affordable housing in the State of California, including San Diego County (https://www.gov.ca.gov/2019/03/11/governor-newsom-announces-legislative-proposals-to- confront-the-housing-cost-crisis/) and which continues to exist to this day; and WHEREAS, over 42% of the housing stock in the City of Chula Vista is rental housing and 44% of all Chula Vista renters pay more than 50% of their income towards housing costs (2011-2015 CHAS); and WHEREAS, 47% of Chula Vista’s households are of lower income and earn 80% of the Area Median Income or less ($68,000 annual income for a family of four) and 46% of these households pay more than 50% of their income towards housing costs as renters and homeowners (2011-2015 CHAS); and WHEREAS, the City’s COVID-19 Emergency Rental Assistance Program (“ERAP”) via SBCS has received 7,339 ERAP applications, of which 6,189 were processed, through April 21, 2022; and WHEREAS, Chula Vista residents, particularly those within low wage and service industries, have suffered the loss of or limited work opportunities and are experiencing unexpected loss of income. These households are at risk of failing to maintain housing and falling into homelessness; and WHEREAS, given existing income levels of Chula Vista residents and the existing high cost of housing in San Diego County prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, including in Chula Vista, any further reductions in income and increased housing costs would exacerbate existing housing affordability issues; and WHEREAS, a recent report shows that Chula Vista rents increased by 16% over the last year (https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/investigations/your-stories-8/skyrocketing-rent-hikes- across-san-diego-new-report-shows/509-ee7f4ae5-c360-4ea7-bb59-55c4cb5f86d7); and WHEREAS, further economic impacts are anticipated (including high inflation, increased food and transportation costs, rising rents, and higher mortgage rates) leaving tenants vulnerable to eviction; and 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 30 of 810 Ordinance Page 2 WHEREAS, it in the interest of protecting the public health and welfare, it is essent ial to avoid unnecessary housing displacement, to maintain the City’s affordable housing stock, and to prevent housed individuals from falling into homelessness; and WHEREAS, in August 2020, the California legislature adopted state residential eviction protections for tenants unable to pay rent due to the COVID -19 pandemic and preempted local eviction protections (the state eviction protections were extended to residential tenancies through March 31, 2022); and WHEREAS, displacement of residential tenants caused by eviction creates undue hardship on these tenants by making it difficult to follow public health orders and guidance of social distancing and isolation, and puts them at risk of homelessness due to the City’s documented shortage of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, through “No Fault” evictions, tenants can be evicted and displaced from their homes despite satisfying monthly rental obligations and acting in good faith to comply with the terms of their lease; and WHEREAS, a Tenant’s sudden and immediate displacement caused by a “No Fault” eviction can have a profound impact on the financial, emotional, and professional stability of a Tenant’s life; and WHEREAS, the Covid-19 Pandemic continues to impact our communities and evictions have been associated with higher COVID-19 transmission and mortality through overcrowded living environments, transiency, reduced access to healthcare, and challenges to comply with mitigation strategies; and WHEREAS, the State of California has recognized the impact of evictions on individuals and established the State Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482; Civil Code section 1946.2); and WHEREAS, the State Tenant Protection Act authorizes local jurisdictions to adopt requirements for just cause termination of a residential tenancy that are more protective than the provisions in the State Tenant Protection Act of 2019; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance is intended to address threats to the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Chula Vista, to ensure that residents continue to have stable housing, and to protect residents from avoidable homelessness; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance adopts requirements for just cause termination of a residential Tenancy that are more protective than the provisions in the State Tenant Protection Act of 2019, and provides additional tenant protections. NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: Section I. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds as follows: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 31 of 810 Ordinance Page 3 1. The just cause for termination of a residential tenancy under this local ordinance is consistent with the State of California’s Tenant Protection Act of 2019. 2. This local ordinance further limits the reasons for termination of a residential tenancy, provides for higher relocation assistance amounts, and provides additional tenant protections that are not prohibited by any other provision of law. 3. This local ordinance is more protective than the provisions of the State of California’s Tenant Protection Act of 2019. Section II. Chapter 9.65 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is added as follows: Chapter 9.65 RESIDENTIAL TENANT PROTECTION ORDINANCE Sections: 9.65.010 Title and Purpose. 9.65.020 Promulgation of Administrative Regulations. 9.65.030 Definitions. 9.65.040 Residential Tenancies Not Subject to This Chapter. 9.65.050 Harassment and Retaliation Against Tenant Prohibited. 9.65.060 Just Cause Required for Termination of Tenancy. 9.65.070 Requirements Upon Termination of Tenancy. 9.65.080 Enforcement and Remedies. 9.65.090 Sunset Clause. 9.65.010 Title and Purpose. A. Title. This chapter shall be known as the Chula Vista Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance and may be referred to herein as the Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance. B. Purpose. Subject to the provisions of applicable law, the purpose of the Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance is to require Just Cause for termination of residential tenancies consistent with Civil Code section 1946.2, to further limit the reasons for termination of a residential tenancy, to require greater tenant relocation 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 32 of 810 Ordinance Page 4 assistance in specified circumstances, and to provide additional tenant protections. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as to prevent the lawful eviction of a tenant by appropriate legal means. 9.65.020 Promulgation of Administrative Regulations. The City Manager is authorized to establish, consistent with the terms of this chapter, Administrative Regulations necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. Administrative Regulations shall be published on the City’s website, and maintained and available to the public in the Office of the City Clerk. Administrative Regulations promulgated by the City Manager shall become effective and enforceable under the terms of this chapter thirty (30) days after the date of publication on the City’s website. 9.65.030 Definitions. When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them below. Words and phrases not specifically defined below shall have the meanings ascribed to them elsewhere in this Code, or shall otherwise be defined by common usage. For definitions of nouns, the singular shall also include the plural; for definitions of verbs, all verb conjugations shall be included. Any reference to State laws, including references to any California statutes or regulations, is deemed to include any successor or amended version of the referenced statute or regulations promulgated thereunder consistent with the terms of this Chapter. “Administrative Regulations” means regulations that implement this chapter authorized by the City Manager pursuant to Section 9.65.020. “Bad Faith” or “in Bad Faith” means with the intent to vex, annoy, harass, coerce, defraud, provoke or injure another person. This includes the intent of an Owner to induce a Tenant to vacate a Residential Rental Unit through unlawful conduct. “City” means the City of Chula Vista. “City Attorney” means the City Attorney of the City of Chula Vista, or their designee. “City Manager” means the City Manager of the City of Chula Vista, or their designee. “County” means the County of San Diego. "Disabled" means an individual with a disability, as defined in California Government Code Section 12955.3. "Elderly" means an individual sixty-two (62) years old or older. “Enforcement Officer” means the Director of Development Services, a Code Enforcement Manager, any Code Enforcement Officer, the Building Official, any sworn Officer of the Police Department, the Fire Chief, the Fire Marshal, or any other City department head (to the extent responsible for enforcing provisions of this code), their respective designees, or any other City 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 33 of 810 Ordinance Page 5 employee designated by the City Manager to enforce this chapter. “Family Member” means the spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents or grandparents of the residential unit Owner. “Housing Service" means services provided by the Owner to the Tenant in connection with the use and occupancy of a Residential Rental Unit, either pursuant to contract or as required by law, including repairs, maintenance, and painting; providing light, heat, hot and cold water; window shades and screens; storage; kitchen, bath, and laundry facilities and privileges; janitor services; pest control; elevator service; access to exterior doors, entry systems, and gates; utility charges that are paid by the Owner; refuse removal; furnishings; parking; the right to have a specified number of occupants, and any other benefit, privilege, or facility connected with the use or occupancy of any Residential Rental Unit. Housing Services also includes the proportionate part of services provided to common facilities of the building in which the Residential Rental Unit is located. “Owner” (including the term “Landlord”) means any Person, acting as principal or through an agent, having the right to offer a Residential Rental Unit for rent . As the context may require, “Owner” shall also include a predecessor in interest to the Owner. “Person” means any individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, joint stock company, corporation, estate, trust, business trust, receiver, trustee, syndicate, or any other group or combination acting as a unit. “Residential Rental Complex” means one or more buildings, located on a single lot, contiguous lots, or lots separated only by a street or alley, containing three or more Residential Rental Units rented or owned by the same Owner. “Residential Rental Unit” means any dwelling or unit that is intended for human habitation, including any dwelling or unit in a mobilehome park that is not a Mobilehome Residency Law (“MRL”) Tenancy defined by Civil Code Section 798.12 (or a tenancy governed by the MRL). “State” means the State of California. “Substantial Remodel” means improvements to a Residential Rental Unit meeting all of the following criteria: 1. Any structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical system is being replaced or substantially modified; and 2. The cost of the improvements (excluding insurance proceeds, land costs, and architectural/engineering fees) is equal to or greater than $40 per square foot of the Residential Rental Unit; and 3. A permit is required from a governmental agency, or the abatement of hazardous materials, including lead-based paint, mold, or asbestos is required in accordance with applicable 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 34 of 810 Ordinance Page 6 federal, State, County, or City laws and cannot be reasonably accomplished in a safe manner with the Tenant in place; and 4. It is necessary for the Residential Rental Unit to be vacant for more than sixty (60) days in order to complete the improvements. Cosmetic improvements alone, including, but not limited to, painting, decorating, flooring replacement, counter replacement, and minor repairs, or other work that can be performed safely without having the Residential Rental Unit vacated, do not constitute a Substantial Remodel. “Tenancy” means the lawful occupation of a Residential Rental Unit and includes a lease or sublease. “Tenant” means a tenant, subtenant, lessee, sublessee, resident manager, or any other individual entitled by written or oral agreement to the use or occupancy of any Residential Rental Unit. 9.65.040 Residential Tenancies Not Subject to this Chapter. This chapter shall not apply to the following types of residential tenancies or circumstances: A. Single-family Owner-occupied residences, including a mobilehome, in which the Owner- occupant rents or leases no more than two units or bedrooms, including, but not limited to, an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit. B. A property containing two separate dwelling units within a single structure in which the Owner occupied one of the units as the Owner’s principal place of residence at the beginning of the Tenancy, so long as the Owner continues in occupancy, and neither unit is an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit. C. A Residential Rental Unit that is alienable separate from the title to any other dwelling unit, provided that both of the following apply: 1. The Owner is not any of the following: a. A real estate investment trust, as defined in Section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code. b. A corporation. c. A limited liability company in which at least one member is a corporation. d. Management of a mobilehome park, as defined in Section 798.2 of the Civil Code. 2. The Tenants have been provided written notice that the Residential Rental Unit is exempt from this section using the following statement: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 35 of 810 Ordinance Page 7 “This property is not subject to the rent limits imposed by Section 1947.12 of the Civil Code and is not subject to Just Cause requirements of Section 1946.2 of the Civil Code and Chapter 9.65 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. This property meets the requirements of sections 1947.12(d)(5) and 1946.2(e)(8) of the Civil Code and section 9.65.040(C) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, and the Owner is not any of the following: (1) a real estate investment trust, as defined in Section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code; (2) a corporation; or (3) a limited liability company in which at least one member is a corporation.” For a Tenancy existing before March 1, 2023, the notice required above may, but is not required to, be provided in the rental agreement. For a Tenancy commenced or renewed on or after March 1, 2023, the notice required above shall be provided in the rental agreement. Addition of a provision containing the notice required above to any new or renewed rental agreement or fixed-term lease constitutes a similar provision for the purposes of section 9.65.060(B)(5). D. A homeowner in a mobilehome, as defined in Civil Code section 798.9 or a tenancy as defined in Civil Code section 798.12. This chapter shall also not apply to a non-owner Tenant of a mobilehome. Instead, a non-owner Tenant of a mobilehome shall retain the rights stated in the State Tenant Protection Act. E. Transient and tourist hotel occupancy as defined in Civil Code section 1940(b). F. Any residential occupancy by reason of concession, permit, right of access, license or other agreement for a period for 30 consecutive calendar days or less, counting portions of calendar days as full days, including Short-Term Rental occupancies as defined in Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 5.68. G. Housing accommodations in a nonprofit hospital, religious facility, extended care facility, licensed residential care facility for the elderly as defined in Health and Safety Code section 1569.2, or an adult residential facility as defined in Chapter 6 of Division 6 of Title 22 of the Manual of Policies and Procedures published by the State Department of Social Services. H. Residential Property or Dormitories owned by the City, an institution of higher education, or a kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive. I. Housing accommodations in which the tenant shares a bathroom or kitchen facilities with the Owner who maintains their principal residence at the Residential Rental Unit. J. Housing restricted by deed, regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency, or other recorded document as affordable housing for individuals and families of very low, low, or moderate income as defined in Health and Safety Code section 50093, or subject to an agreement that provides housing subsidies for affordable housing for individuals and families of very low, low, or moderate income as defined in Health and Safety Code section 50093 or comparable federal statutes. This exclusion shall not apply to a Tenant with a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and such Tenancies shall be governed by this chapter. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 36 of 810 Ordinance Page 8 9.65.050 Harassment and Retaliation Against Tenant Prohibited. A. No Owner or such Owner's agent, contractor, subcontractor, or employee, alone or in concert with another, shall do any of the following in Bad Faith to a Tenant or with respect to a Residential Rental Unit, as applicable: 1. Interrupt, terminate, or fail to provide Housing Services required by contract or by law, including federal, State, County, or City laws; 2. Fail to perform repairs and maintenance required by contract or by law, including federal, State, County, or City laws; 3. Fail to exercise commercially reasonable efforts and diligence to commence and complete repairs or maintenance; 4. Abuse the Owner's right of lawful access into a Residential Rental Unit. This includes entries for “inspections” that are not related to necessary repairs or services; entries excessive in number; entries that improperly target certain Tenants or are used to collect evidence against the occupant or otherwise beyond the scope of an otherwise lawful entry; 5. Abuse the Tenant with words which are offensive and inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction; 6. Influence or attempt to influence a Tenant to vacate a rental housing unit through fraud, intimidation or coercion; 7. Threaten the Tenant, by word or gesture, with physical harm; 8. Violate any law that prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, sexual preference, sexual orientation, ethnic background, nationality, religion, age, parenthood, marriage, pregnancy, disability, AIDS, occupancy by a minor child, or any other protect ed classification; 9. Take action to terminate any Tenancy including service of notice to quit or other eviction notice or bring any action to recover possession of a Residential Rental Unit based upon facts that the Owner has no reasonable cause to believe to be true or upon a legal theory that is untenable under the facts known to the Owner. No Owner shall be liable under this section for bringing an action to recover possession unless or until the Tenant has obtained a favorable termination of that action. This subsection shall not apply to any attorney who in good faith initiates legal proceedings against a Tenant on behalf of an Owner to recover possession of a Residential Rental Unit; 10. Interfere with a Tenant's right to quiet use and enjoyment of a Residential Rental Unit as that right is defined by State law; 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 37 of 810 Ordinance Page 9 11. Refuse to accept or acknowledge receipt of a Tenant's lawful rent payment, excluding circumstances where an unlawful detainer or other civil action is pending that could be impacted by acceptance of rent; 12. Interfere with a Tenant's right to privacy. This includes entering or photographing portions of a Residential Rental Unit that are beyond the scope of a lawful entry or inspection. B. No Owner shall retaliate against a Tenant because of the Tenant's exercise of rights under this chapter. A court may consider the protections afforded by this chapter in evaluating a claim of retaliation. C. This section shall not apply to Mobilehome Residency Law (“MRL”) Tenancies under Civil Code section 798.12 or mobilehome Tenants because the provisions of Section 1940.2 of the Civil Code and Division 2, Part 2, Chapter 2.5 of the Civil Code apply to such Tenancies. 9.65.060 Just Cause Required for Termination of Tenancy. A. Prohibition. No Owner of a Residential Rental Unit shall terminate a Tenancy without Just Cause. A Just Cause basis for Termination of Tenancy includes both “At Fault Just Cause” and “No-Fault Just Cause” circumstances as described below. B. At Fault Just Cause. At Fault Just Cause means any of the following: 1. Default in payment of rent. 2. A breach of material term of the lease, as described in paragraph (3) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure, including, but not li mited to, violation of a provision of the lease after being issued a written notice to correct the violation. 3. Maintaining, committing, or permitting the maintenance or commission of a nuisance as described in paragraph (4) of Section 1161 of the Code of C ivil Procedure. 4. Committing waste as described in paragraph (4) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 5. The Tenant had a written lease that terminated on or after the effective date of this chapter, and after a written request or demand from the Owner, the Tenant has refused to execute a written extension or renewal of the lease for an additional term of sim ilar duration with similar provisions, provided that those terms do not violate this section or any other provision of law. Addition of a provision allowing the Owner to terminate the Tenancy to allow for occupancy by the Owner or Owner’s Family Member as described in section 9.65.060(C)(1), below, shall constitute a “similar provision” for the purposes of this subsection. 6. Criminal activity by the Tenant at the Residential Rental Unit, including any common 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 38 of 810 Ordinance Page 10 areas, or any criminal activity or criminal threat, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 422 of the Penal Code, on or off the property where the Residential Rental Unit is located, that is directed at any Owner, any agent of the Owner, or any other Tenant of the Residential Rental Unit or of the property where the Residential Rental Unit is located. 7. Assigning or subletting the premises in violation of the Tenant’s lease, as described in paragraph (4) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 8. The Tenant’s refusal to allow the Owner to ente r the Residential Rental Unit as authorized by Sections 1101.5 and 1954 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and Sections 13113.7 and 17926.1 of the Health and Safety Code. 9. Using the premises for an unlawful purpose as described in paragraph (4) of Section 116 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A Tenant shall not be considered to have used the premises for an unlawful purpose solely on the basis of the fact that the Owner’s Residential Rental Unit is unpermitted, illegal, or otherwise unauthorized under applicable laws. 10. The employee, agent, or licensee’s failure to vacate after their termination as an employee, agent, or a licensee as described in paragraph (1) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 11. When the Tenant fails to deliver possession of the Res idential Rental Unit after providing the Owner written notice as provide in Section 1946 of the Civil Code of the Tenant’s intention to terminate the hiring of the real property or makes a written offer to surrender that is accepted in writing by the Owner but fails to deliver possession at the time specified in that written notice as described in paragraph (5) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure. C. No Fault Just Cause. No Fault Just Cause means any of the following: 1. Intent to Occupy by Owner or Family Member. The Tenancy is terminated on the basis that the Owner or Owner’s Family Member intends to occupy the Residential Rental Unit. For leases entered into on or after July 1, 2020, Intent to Occupy by Owner or Family Member shall only be a No Fault Just Cause basis for termination if the Tenant agrees, in writing, to the termination, or if a provision of the lease allows the owner to terminate the lease if the Owner or Family Membe r unilaterally decides to occupy the residential real property. 2. Compliance with Government or Court Order. The Tenancy is terminated on the basis of the Owner’s compliance with any of the following: a. An order issued by a government agency or court relating to habitability that necessitates vacating the Residential Rental Unit ; or 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 39 of 810 Ordinance Page 11 b. An order issued by a government agency or court to vacate the Residential Rental Unit; or c. A local ordinance that necessitates vacating the Residential Rental Unit. If it is determined by any government agency or court that the Tenant is at fault for the condition or conditions triggering the order or need to vacate under this subsection, the Tenant shall not be entitled to relocation assistance as set forth in this Chapter. 3. Withdrawal From the Rental Market. The Tenancy is terminated on the basis of the Owner’s decision to withdraw the Residential Rental Unit from the rental market. 4. Substantial Remodel or Complete Demolition . The Tenancy is terminated because of the Owner’s decision to Substantially Remodel or completely demolish a Residential Rental Unit. D. Notice to Tenant of Tenant Protection Provisions Required. An Owner of a Residential Rental Unit subject to this chapter shall provide written notice in no le ss than 12-point type to the Tenant as follows: “California law limits the amount your rent can be increased. See Civil Code section 1947.12 for more information. Local law also provides an Owner must provide a statement of cause in any notice to terminate a Tenancy. In some circumstances, Tenants who are elderly (62 years or older) or disabled may be entitled to additional Tenant protections. See Chula Vista Municipal Code chapter 9.65 for more information.” For a Tenancy in a Residential Rental Unit subject to this Chapter existing before the effective date of this Chapter, the notice required above shall be provided to the Tenant directly or as an addendum to the lease or rental agreement no later than March 1, 2023. For a Tenancy in a Residential Rental Unit subject to this Chapter commenced or renewed on or after March 1, 2023, the notice required above shall be included as an addendum to the lease or rental agreement, or as a written notice signed by the Tenant, with a copy provided to the Tenant. The provision of this notice shall be subject to Civil Code section 1632. E. Reporting Requirements. Owners and Tenants shall provide City with information regarding termination of Tenancies at such time(s) and with such details as shall be required by City in the attendant Administrative Regulations. 9.65.070 Requirements Upon Termination of a Tenancy. A. Requirements Upon Termination of a Tenancy for At Fault Just Cause. Before an Owner of a Residential Rental Unit issues a notice to terminate a Tenancy for At Fault Just Cause that is a curable lease violation, the Owner shall first give written notice of the violation to the Tenant including a description of the violation (or violations) and an opportunity to cure the 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 40 of 810 Ordinance Page 12 violation pursuant to paragraph (3) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If the violation is not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, a three -day notice to quit without an opportun ity to cure may thereafter be served to terminate the Tenancy. B. Requirements Upon Termination of a Tenancy for No Fault Just Cause. Upon termination of a Tenancy for No Fault Just Cause, an Owner of a Residential Rental Unit shall provide notice and relocation assistance as follows: 1. Tenancy in Unit in a Residential Rental Complex . When an Owner terminates a Tenancy of a Residential Rental Unit in a Residential Rental Complex for No-Fault Just Cause, the Owner shall provide notice and relocation assi stance to the Tenant as follows: a. Notice to Tenant Required . The Owner shall give written notice to the Tenant at least 30 or 60 days prior to the proposed date of termination as required by Civil Code section 1946.1, in no less than 12-point font of: i. Notice of Basis for No Fault Just Cause Termination. The Owner’s decision to terminate the Tenancy and a description of the basis for said termination. ii. Notice of Right to Relocation Assistance. The Tenant’s right to relocation assistance or rent waiver pursuant to this section. If the Owner elects to waive the Tenant’s rent, the notice shall state the amount of rent waived and that no rent is due for the final corresponding months of the Tenancy. Any relocation assistance payment shall be provided by the Owner to the Tenant within fifteen (15) calendar days of service of the notice; and iii. Notice of Right to Receive Future Offer. The Tenant’s right to receive an offer to renew the Tenancy in the event that the Residential Rental Unit is offered again for rent or lease for residential purposes within two (2) years of the date the Residential Rental Unit was withdrawn from the rental market, and that to exercise such right, the Tenant: (a) must notify the Owner in writing within thirty (30) days of the termination notice of such desire to consider an offer to renew the Tenancy in the event that the Residential Rental Unit is offered again for rent or lease for residential purposes; (b) furnish the Owner with an address or email address to which that offer is to be directed; (c) and advise the Owner at any time of a change of address to which an offer is to be directed. b. Notice to City Required. The Owner shall provide written notice to the City of the No Fault Just Cause Termination of Tenancy no later than three business (3) days after the date the Owner provides the required notice to the Tenant. Such notice to City shall be provided on a form approved by City for such purpose and in the manner specified in the attendant Administrative Regulations. The City shall acknowledge receipt of the Owner’s notice to City within three (3) business days of City’s receipt of such notice. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 41 of 810 Ordinance Page 13 c. Relocation Assistance Required. The Owner shall, regardless of the Tenant’s income or length of Tenancy, at the Owner’s option, do one of the following to assist the Tenant to relocate: i. Provide a direct payment to the Tenant in an amount equal to the greater of: two (2) months of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Small Area Fair Market Rents Amount for the zip code in which the Residential Rental Unit is located when the Owner issued the notice to terminate the Tenancy, or two (2) months of actual then in effect contract rent under Tenant’s lease. If the Tenant is Elderly or Disabled, then the direct payment shall be in an amount equal to the greater of: three (3) months of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Small Area Fair Market Rents Amount for the zip code in which the Residential Rental Unit is located when the Owner issued the notice to terminate the Tenancy, or three (3) months of actual contract rent; or ii. Waive in writing and not collect the payment by Tenant of then due or future rent otherwise due under the lease in an amount equivalent to the direct payment described in (i), above. 2. Tenancy in Unit Not in a Residential Rental Complex. When an Owner terminates a Tenancy of a Residential Rental Unit that is not in a Residential Rental Complex for No - Fault Just Cause, the Owner shall provide notice and relocation assistance to the Tenant as follows: a. Notice to Tenant Required . The Owner shall give written notice to the Tenant at least 30 or 60 days prior to the proposed date of termination as required by Civil Code section 1946.1, in no less than 12-point font of: i. Notice of Basis for No Fault Just Cause Termination. The Owner’s decision to terminate the Tenancy and a description of the basis for said termination. ii. Notice of Right to Relocation Assistance. The Tenant’s right to relocation assistance or rent waiver pursuant to this section. If the Owner elects to waive the Tenant’s rent, the notice shall state the amount of rent waived and that no rent is due for the final corresponding months of the Tenancy. Any relocation assistance payment shall be provided by the Owner to the Tenant within fifteen (15) calendar days of service of the notice; and b. Notice to City Required. The Owner shall provide written notice to the City of the No Fault Just Cause Termination of Tenancy no later than three business (3) days after the date the Owner provides the required notice to the Tenant. Such notice to City shall be provided on a form approved by City for such purpose and in the manner specified in the attendant Administrative Regulations. The City shall acknowledge receipt of the Owner’s notice to City within three (3) business days of City’s receipt of such notice. c. Relocation Assistance Required. The Owner shall, regardless of the Tenant’s income 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 42 of 810 Ordinance Page 14 or length of Tenancy, at the Owner’s option, do one of the following to assist the Tenant to relocate: i. Provide a direct payment to the Tenant in an amount equal to one (1) month of actual then in effect contract rent under Tenant’s lease; or ii. Waive in writing and not collect the payment by Tenant of then due or future rent otherwise due under the lease in an amount equivalent to the direct payment described in (i), above. C. Additional Requirements Upon Termination of a Tenancy for No Fault Just Cause. Upon termination of a Tenancy for No Fault Just Cause, the following additional provisions shall also apply: 1. When more than one Tenant occupies a rental unit and the Owner opts to provide direct payment of relocation assistance to the Tenants, the Owner may make a single direct payment to all Tenants named on the rental agreement. 2. The relocation assistance or rent waiver required by this section shall be in addition to the return of any deposit or security amounts owed to the Tenant. 3. Any relocation assistance or rent waiver to which a Tenant may be entitled to under this section shall be in addition to and shall not be credited against any other relocation assistance required by any other law. 4. If the Tenant fails to vacate after the expiration of the notice to terminate the Tenancy, the actual amount of any relocation assistance or rent waiver provided pursuant to this section may be recoverable by Owner as damages in an action to recover possession. 5. If a Residential Rental Unit in a Residential Rental Complex is offered for rent or lease for residential purposes within two (2) years of the date the Tenancy was terminated, the Owner shall first offer the unit for rent or lease to the Tenant displaced from that unit by the No Fault Just Cause termination if the Tenant: (a) advised the Owner in writing within thirty (30) days of the termination notice of the Tenant’s desire to consider an offer to renew the Tenancy; and (b) furnished the Owner with an address or email address to which that offer is to be directed. The Owner shall have the right to screen the Tenant using industry accepted methods and shall communicate such minimum screening criteria in the offer for the new Tenancy, subject to the terms of any attendant Administrative Regulations. 6. With regard to termination of a Tenancy of a Residential Rental Unit in a Residential Rental Complex on the basis of a withdrawal of the unit from the rental market, as described in Section 9.65.060(C)(3), should the property that had been taken off the market be placed on the rental market again within two (2) years of the termination of the Tenancy, then the Owner shall be liable to Tenant for the greater of: (i) six (6) month’s rent to the last tenant of the Residential Rental Unit at the rental rate in place at the time the rental unit is re- 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 43 of 810 Ordinance Page 15 rented as set forth U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Small Area Fair Market Rents Amount for the zip code in which the Residential Rental Unit is located; or (ii) six (6) months of actual then in effect contract rent under the Tenant’s lease at time of termination. This section does not apply if the property is rented to Owner’s Family Member, converted to another non-rental use, or sold or otherwise transferred to a bona fide third-party during the two (2) year period. 7. Among other remedies applicable to Owner’s failure to comply with the terms of this chapter, an Owner’s failure to strictly comply with this section shall render the notice of termination void. 9.65.080 Enforcement and Remedies. A. Guiding Principles. The City seeks to promote good relations between Owners and Tenants, and in furtherance of such goal, provides the following guiding principles: 1. Owners and Tenants should treat each other with respect, listen to each other, and make good faith efforts to informally resolve issues. If Owners and Tenants cannot informally resolve issues, alternative dispute resolution and mediation programs should be voluntarily utilized. 2. If disputes are not able to be settled despite the use of dispute resolution or mediation programs, the primary enforcement mechanism is otherwise expected to be the Private Remedies set forth in Section 9.65.080(D) below. 3. The City shall have the sole and unfettered discretion to determine if and when City will engage in City enforcement of this chapter. Owners and Tenants are highly encouraged to independently resolve disputes as set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. B. General Provisions. 1. The enforcement mechanisms and remedies specified in this section are cumulative and in addition to any other enforcement mechanisms and remedies available under federal, State, County, and City law for violation of this chapter or Code. 2. It shall be unlawful for any Person to violate any provision or fail to comply with the requirements of this chapter. Each day that a violation continues is deemed to be a new and separate offense. 3. Any waiver of the rights under this chapter shall be void as contrary to public policy. C. City Attorney Enforcement. 1. Alternative Remedies. The City Attorney may require Owner and Tenant to participate in education programs related to Owner-Tenant issues, mediation, or an alternative dispute resolution program. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 44 of 810 Ordinance Page 16 2. Administrative Citations and Penalties. The City Attorney or an Enforcement Officer may issue administrative citations or civil penalties in accordance with Chapter 1.41 of this Code for violation of any of the provisions of this chapter. Civil penalties for violations of this chapter may be assessed at a rate not to exceed $5,000 per violation per day. When a violation occurs, it is not required that a warning or notice to cure must first be given before an administrative citation or civil penalty may be issued. 3. Civil Action. The City, or the City Attorney on behalf of the People of the State of California, may seek injunctive relief to enjoin violations of, or to compel compliance with, this chapter or seek any other relief or remedy available at law or equity, including the imposition of monetary civil penalties. Civil penalties for violations of this chapter may be assessed at a rate not to exceed $5,000 per violation per day. The City may also pursue damages as set forth in Section 9.65.070(C)(6). 4. Criminal Violation. An Owner who interferes or facilitates interference with a Tenant’s peaceful enjoyment, use, possession or occupancy of a Residential Rental Unit by (a) threat, fraud, intimidation, coercion, or duress, (b) maintenance or toleration of a public nuisance, (c) cutting off heat, light, water, fuel, Wi-Fi, or free communication by anyone by mail, email, telephone/cell phone, or otherwise, or (d) restricting trade (including the use of delivery services for goods or food) or tradespersons from or to any such Tenant, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for a period of not more than six months, or by both a fine and imprisonment. At the sole discretion of the City Attorney, such violation may, in the alternative, be cited and prosecuted as an infraction. 5. Subpoena Authority. The City Attorney shall have the power to issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses, to compel their attendance and testimony, to administer oaths and affirmations, to take evidence, and to issue subpoenas for the production of any papers, books, accounts, records, documents or other items that may be relevant to the City Attorney’s investigation, enforcement action, or prosecution. The City Attorney may exercise such powers prior to or following the commencement of any civil, crimi nal, or administrative action to the fullest extent allowed by law. D. Private Remedies. 1. Civil Action. An aggrieved Tenant may institute a civil action for injunctive relief, direct money damages, and any other relief allowed by law, including the assessment of civil penalties in the amount of no less than $2,000 and no more than $5,000 per violation per day. If the aggrieved Tenant is Elderly or Disabled, additional civil penalties of up to $5,000 per violation per day may be assessed at the discretion of the court. A Tenant may also pursue damages as set forth in Section 9.65.070(C)(6). 2. Affirmative Defense. A violation of this chapter may be asserted as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer or other civil action. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 45 of 810 Ordinance Page 17 3. Attorney’s Fees. The court may award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to a party who prevails in any action described in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. 9.65.090 Sunset Clause. This chapter shall remain in effect until January 1, 2030, and as of that date is repealed unless otherwise extended by the City Council. Section III. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court o f competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. Section IV. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section V. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force beginning March 1, 2023. Section VI. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Laura C. Black, AICP Glen R. Googins Director of Development Services City Attorney 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 46 of 810 City of Chula Vista Tenants and Landlords Survey 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 47 of 810 Whom Did We Survey? 2 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 48 of 810 3 Research Methodology Length of Interview 5 -8 minutes Target Audience Tenants •Must live in Chula Vista •Must rent their primary residence Landlords •Owned property in Chula Vista that they rented out to others Sample Size N = 271 Tenant Respondents N = 89 Landlord Respondents who rent out 116 separate units Luth hosted the survey which was offered in both English and Spanish. Luth sent out email invites to panelists on the SurveySavvy panel who live in one of the Chula Vista zip codes. The City of Chula Vista and partners used mass emails, newsletters, website postings and social media to send survey links to residents and landlords in Chula Vista. Survey fielding occurred from July 6 –July 26, 2022 3 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 49 of 810 Tenant Results 4 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 50 of 810 5 The majority of tenant respondents are in the 91910 and 91911 zip codes. Zip Codes QS3A: What zip code is the home or apartment you are currently renting? Tenants 100% 5% 41% 26% 17% 2%8% Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total n=271 Tenant Respondents 91910 91911 91914 91915 91902 91913 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 51 of 810 6 Single Family Detached Homes are the most common dwelling type rented in the 91902, 91914 and 91915 zip codes. For the remaining zip codes, a rental complex with 11 or more units are the most common dwelling type. Condo rentals are found more in the 91914 and 91915 zip codes. Type of Dwelling Rented Tenants QR1: What type of property are you currently renting in Chula Vista? Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 Single Family Detached House 25%31%25%20%28%33%36% ADU (that is an Accessory Dwelling Unit) of a Single Family House 1%2%5% Duplex 9%8%13%8%6% Rental complex with 3-5 units 8%15%8%13%4%17% Rental complex with 6-10 units 10%15%10%13%9% Rental complex with 11 or more units 37%23%33%44%43%17%36% Condominium 9%8%9%3%11%33%23% 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 52 of 810 7 Only one in ten tenant respondents are renting a property that the owner also lives on. Owner Occupied Tenants 10% 23% 7% 17% 4% 17% 9% Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Zip Code of Property QR2: Does the owner also live on the property? 10%12% 67% 8% 26% 8%7%4% Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Dwelling Type Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 53 of 810 8 Only one in ten tenant respondents are renting a property that the owner also lives on. Owner Occupied Tenants 10% 23% 7% 17% 4% 17% 9% Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Zip Code of Property QR2: Does the owner also live on the property? 10%12% 67% 8% Total Single Family ADU Duplex Dwelling Type Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 Base:271 69 3 25 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 54 of 810 9 Nearly one in five tenant respondents have been in the property ten years or longer. Length of Time Lived in Residence by Zip Code Tenants QR3: How long have you lived in this residence? Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 Less than 12 months 7%3%4%17%17%23% 1 –2 years 10%8%11%10%13% 2 –3 years 15%31%13%11%21%17%14% 3 –5 years 22%23%21%18%30%17%23% 5 –10 years 28%31%30%34%9%50%36% 10 years or more 18%8%22%23%11%5% Overall average length of tenancy in years 5.8 4.5 6.7 6.7 3.6 3.3 4.0 Overall median length of tenancy in years 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 55 of 810 10 Single Family Homes, duplexes and smaller 3 to 5 unit buildings have tenant respondents who have lived in them longer. Length of Time Lived in Residence by Unit Type Tenants QR3: How long have you lived in this residence? Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 Less than 1 year 7%6%33%4%9%4%10%4% 1 –2 years 10%7%8%9%4%13%12% 2 –3 years 15%9%8%13%15%18%28% 3 –5 years 22%13%67%28%26%38%21%20% 5 –10 years 28%41%24%13%23%25%36% 10 years or more 18%25%28%30%15%13% Overall average length of tenancy in years 5.8 7.2 2.3 7.0 6.7 5.8 4.8 3.8 Overall median length of tenancy in years 4.0 6.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 56 of 810 11 Nearly one-half of tenant respondents are renting two- bedroom units and one in three are renting three-bedroom units. Total number of Units and % by Bedroom Count Tenants Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 One 16%15%18%14%15%17%18% Two 47%38%49%63%38%17%14% Three 29%38%26%20%34%50%55% Four or more 8%8%7%3%13%17%14% QR4: How many bedrooms do you have? Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 One 16%4%67%4%30%19%25%4% Two 47%17%68%43%69%59%44% Three 29%52%33%16%26%12%16%52% Four or more 8%26%12% 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 57 of 810 12 Rent Paid Tenants Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 One Bedroom $1482.7 $1200.0 $1292.8 $1338.0 $1873.4 $2260.0 $2057.0 Two Bedrooms $1985.9 $2345.0 $1903.7 $1839.0 $2405.8 $2000.0 $2575.0 Three Bedrooms $2368.7 $2585.0 $2213.1 $2041.4 $2722.1 $2166.7 $2615.8 Four or more Bedrooms $3332.0 $3950.0 $3006.3 $3599.0 $3200.0 $4000.0 $3858.3 QR5: What is your current rent amount? Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 $1,000 or less 4%8%4%8% $1,001 to $1,499 11%14%14%4%5% $1,500 to $1,999 29%15%38%35%13%18% $2,000 to $2,499 26%38%26%25%28%67%9% $2,500 to $2,999 17%15%12%14%28%17%32% $3,000 or more 13%23%7%3%28%17%36% Rent Paid Average Rent Paid by Size Over one-half of tenant respondents are paying between $1,500 and $2,500 monthly for rent. The average rent paid for a 1 bedroom in Chula Vista is just under $1,500, it is just under $2,000 for a 2 bedroom and nearly $2,400 for a 3 bedroom rental. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 58 of 810 13 One in five tenant respondents in small buildings are paying less than $1,000 per month for rent. Renters of Single Family Homes and Condos are paying the most for rent. Rent Paid Tenants Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 One Bedroom $1482.7 $1266.3 $1600.0 $1675.0 $1354.3 $1395.0 $1548.3 $1400.0 Two Bedrooms $1985.9 $2158.3 -$1970.3 $1732.9 $1873.1 $1956.7 $2393.2 Three Bedrooms $2368.7 $2448.0 $3200.0 $2200.0 $1912.0 $1891.7 $2350.2 $2480.8 Four or more Bedrooms $3332.0 $3376.3 -$3066.7 ---- QR5: What is your current rent amount? Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 $1,000 or less 4%3%22%4%3% $1,001 to $1,499 11%1%4%9%23%17%8% $1,500 to $1,999 29%12%67%56%30%31%39%4% $2,000 to $2,499 26%30%12%26%38%20%44% $2,500 to $2,999 17%26%12%13%4%14%28% $3,000 or more 13%28%33%16%7%16% Rent Paid Average Rent Paid by Size 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 59 of 810 14 41% of tenant respondents have received a rent increase for 2022. One in three tenant respondents have never had a rent increase. Rent increases are averaging $180 per month for 2022. Rent Increase Tenants Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 In 2022 41%23%42%49%38%32% In 2021 20%27%21%13%18% 2020 or Before 8%23%10%4%4%50% Never had an increase 31%54%21%25%45%50%50% Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base: Had a rent increase 188 6 89 53 26 3 11 $50 or less 18%50%22%9%12%33%9% $51 to $99 9%17%8%8%15% $100 to $149 34%17%35%45%15%27% $150 to $199 13%15%13%12%9% $200 or more 28%17%20%25%46%67%55% Mean increase 180.9 84.2 199.3 133.5 222.8 175.0 215.0 Date of Last Increase Amount of Rent Increase QR6: When was your most recent rent increase? QR7: By how much did your rent increase? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 60 of 810 15 Tenant respondents in larger buildings are much more likely to have received a rent increase in 2022 but the increases are smaller than average. Rent Increase Tenants Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 In 2022 41%35%33%32%35%31%54%28% In 2021 20%17%36%17%19%19%24% 2020 or Before 8%7%8%18%23%2% Never had an increase 31%41%67%24%30%27%22%44% Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base: Had a rent increase 41 1 19 16 19 78 14 41 $50 or less 18%10%26%19%47%15% $51 to $99 9%2%100%5%6%5%14% $100 to $149 34%29%47%31%26%36%29% $150 to $199 13%27%5%13%10%14% $200 or more 28%32%16%31%21%24%57% Mean increase 180.9 190.7 75.0 263.9 137.8 185.7 162.7 190.7 Date of Last Increase Amount of Rent Increase QR6: When was your most recent rent increase? QR7: By how much did your rent increase? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 61 of 810 16 One in ten Chula Vista tenant respondents say they have received an eviction notice or a termination of tenancy in the past three months. Received a Termination of Tenancy Notice Tenants 26 0 11 8 3 0 4 Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 28 3 1 1 3 3 11 4 Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 QR8: Have you received a termination of tenancy or an eviction notice in Chula Vista in the past three months? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 62 of 810 17 One in ten Chula Vista tenant respondents say they have received an eviction notice or a termination of tenancy in the past three months. Received a Termination of Tenancy Notice Tenants 26 0 11 8 3 0 4 11 0 9 1 0 0 1 Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total ACCE 26 3 1 1 3 3 11 4 11 1 0 0 1 1 4 4 Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 Base:271 69 3 25 23 26 100 25 QR8: Have you received a termination of tenancy or an eviction notice in Chula Vista in the past three months? QR10: Do you belong to any of the following organizations? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 63 of 810 18 The primary reason for an eviction notice is for non-payment of rent, however, many have also received notices due to the owner or family moving in and substantial rehabilitation. Reason for Eviction Tenants 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 5 8 Failure to deliver possession Demolition of property Nuisance Refusal of entry to landlord Failure to vacate Covid-related Removal from rental market Substantial rehabilitation Owner or family moved in Non-payment of rent Number of Respondents QR9: Why did you receive a termination of tenancy or an eviction notice? (multiple responses) Total n=271 Tenant Respondents; actual number of respondents shown in table 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 64 of 810 19 The primary reason for an eviction notice is for non-payment of rent, however, many have also received notices due to the owner or family moving in and substantial rehabilitation. Reason for Eviction Tenants 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 5 8 Failure to deliver possession Demolition of property Nuisance Refusal of entry to landlord Failure to vacate Covid-related Removal from rental market Substantial rehabilitation Owner or family moved in Non-payment of rent Number of Respondents Total ACCE QR9: Why did you receive a termination of tenancy or an eviction notice? (multiple responses) Total n=271 Tenant Respondents; actual number of respondents shown in table 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 65 of 810 20 Around one in ten tenants belong to the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) and slightly fewer belong to San Diego Tenants Unite/Tenants Together. Organizations Joined Tenants 10%8%12%13% 2% 17% 5%8% 23% 8%10% 2% 17% 5% Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 ACCE SDTU/SDTT Base:271 13 112 71 47 6 22 QR10: Do you belong to any of the following organizations? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 66 of 810 Landlord Results 21 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 67 of 810 22 Zip Codes and Dwelling Type of Rentals 100% 7% 62% 36% 12%9%4% Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 100% 79% 7%20%13%10%16%18% Total Single Family ADU Duplex 3-5 Units 6-10 Units 11+ Units Condo Base: Landlords = 89 Landlords QL1:Which of the following zip codes below are your properties in? (Multiple responses accepted)2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 68 of 810 23 Single Family Homes Landlords 1% 2% 3% 4% 18% 71% 6 5 4 3 2 1 Number Owned 3% 7% 10% 29% 44% 7% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 70 Base: SFH Units = 89 10% 36% 54% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: SFH Units = 89 QL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted)2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 69 of 810 24 ADU Landlords 17% 83% 2 1 Number Owned 17% 0% 0% 17% 67% 0% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 6 Base: ADU Units = 7 14% 57% 29% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: ADU Units = 7 4 3 Base: ADU Units = 7 Live at property Do Not live at property QL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted) QL3: Continue to think about the properties you lease in the _____ area? Do you also live at f the following property? (Singl e response) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 70 of 810 25 DUPLEX Landlords 5% 0% 5% 19% 71% 5 4 3 2 1 Number Owned 0% 0% 0% 13% 47% 3% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 11 Base: Duplex Units = 21 14% 38% 48% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: Duplex Units = 21 18 3 Base: Duplex Units = 30 Live at property Do Not live at propertyQL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted) QL3: Continue to think about the properties you lease in the _____ area? Do you also live at f the following property? (Singl e response) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 71 of 810 26 Total 3+ Units Landlords 26% 12% 62% 3+ 2 1 Number Owned 2% 8% 8% 31% 40% 8% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 34 Base: 3-5 unit Units = 48 23% 38% 40% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: 3-5 Units Units = 48 QL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted)2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 72 of 810 27 Complex with 3-5 Units Landlords 31% 15% 54% 3 2 1 Number Owned 0% 7% 7% 27% 53% 7% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 11 Base: 3-5 unit Units = 13 8% 31% 62% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: 3-5 Units Units = 13 QL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted)2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 73 of 810 28 Complex with 6-10 Units Landlords 22% 78% 4 1 Number Owned 0% 8% 17% 42% 33% 8% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 9 Base: 6-10 Units = 10 30% 40% 30% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: 6-10 Units = 10 QL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted)2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 74 of 810 29 Complex with 11 or more Units Landlords 7% 13% 13% 69% 5 3 2 1 Number Owned 5% 10% 10% 30% 35% 10% 91915 91914 91913 91911 91910 91902 Zip Codes Base: Landlords = 14 Base: 11+ Units = 17 24% 47% 29% Property Mgr Owner Property Manager Owner/Not a Property Mgr Managed By Base: 11+ Units = 17 QL2: How many properties of the following types are you leasing in the _____ area? (Multiple responses accepted) QL4: Who manages the property/properties for each of the following in the _____ area? (One response per property accepted)2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 75 of 810 30 Termination of Tenancy Notices Total SFD/ Duplex 3+ Units Base: Total Number of Units 157 117 40 Removal from rental market 17 10 7 Demolition of property 12 6 6 Substantial rehabilitation 22 10 12 Government order 9 4 5 Owner or family move-in 15 7 8 Landlords QL6: Have delivered any termination of tenancy notices in the _____ area in the past three months for any of the following no-fault evictions? Actual Number of No-Fault Evictions Reported Eviction Process QL7: Did you provide tenants with any of the following? (multiple responses accepted) Total SFD/ Duplex 3+ Units Base:# of No-Fault Eviction Units 34 20 14 Cash for Keys 10 5 5 Assistance in locating to another rental unit 7 4 3 Moving assistance (physical)5 3 2 Relocation assistance (financial) 13 8 5 Other 0 0 0 None of the Above 10 6 4 Actual Number Provided for No-Fault Evictions 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 76 of 810 31 Number of Residents Affected by No-Fault Eviction Total SFD/ Duplex 3+ Units Removal from rental market Number of Units Removed 17 10 7 Number of Residents Affected 111 50 61 Demolition of property Number of Units Removed 12 6 6 Number of Residents Affected 80 29 51 Substantial rehabilitation Number of Units Removed 22 10 12 Number of Residents Affected 125 46 79 Government order Number of Units Removed 9 4 5 Number of Residents Affected 15 10 5 Owner or family move-in Number of Units Removed 15 7 8 Number of Residents Affected 74 35 39 Landlords Actual Number of Residents Affected QL6: If yes, how many residents were affected?2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 77 of 810 32 Awareness of State Law AB1482 Total SFD Owner Managed 3+ Units Base:89 44 34 Yes 65%59%86% No 35%41%14% Landlords QL8: Are you aware that as a landlord of any type of property, you must provide specific notification about State Law AB1482?(Landlord respondents can be both SFD Owner Managed and Own 3+ Units) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 78 of 810 33 Membership Total 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Base:89 6 55 32 11 8 4 California Apartment Association (CAA) 11%33%15%6% Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS (PSAR) 9%17%7%9%13%50% San Diego Association of REALTORS (SDAR) 9%33%4%9%13%25% Southern California Rental Housing Association (SDRHA) 10%17%7%25% Other 4%5%6% Landlords 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 79 of 810 ATTACHMENT 2 RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT PROVISIONS STAKEHOLDER MEETING NOTES June 2, 2022 10:00AM-11:30AM City of Chula Vista City Hall, Building A - Executive Suite 103 Introductions/Attendees Stacey Kurz, City of Chula Vista, Housing Manager Anne Steinberg, City of Chula Vista, Communications Manager Gabriela Dow, City Consultant, NV5 Melanie Woods, CAA Jeremy Sine, SDAR Gil Vera, Legal Aid Silvia Saldivar, ACCE Jose Lopez, ACCE George Ching, PSAR Chun Che Free, CSA San Diego Rich D’Ascoli, PSAR Danielle Tailleart, Legal Aid Update from Housing Staff 10:10 to 10:20AM - Last meeting was May 17 and Council was presented with two options: 1) draft ordinance for adoption; or 2) city moratorium for no fault evictions. Council directed staff to continue working with stakeholders and bring back an ordinance for consideration. - Everyone was very clear for all parties that there was a need for better education reach for both landlords and tenants. - Reason for the additional resources to CSA San Diego. - Brought on NV-5 to help with the ordinance and education. Goals for today: - Review Survey - Want to survey single family homeowners on what they know about landlord/tenant rights/responsibilities right now – staff suspect many are not aware of current state law requirements. - Develop long term campaigns on local and state laws to education the public, including: - Landlord 101 trainings for single family homeowners. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 80 of 810 ATTACHMENT 2 - City & non-profit staff, once currently scheduled for late July (postponed and held 9/28/22). - Continue to track trends and research to stay current on changing regulations and needs. Assessment of Community/Organizational Assets 10:20 to 10:50AM Question from the city to all of the stakeholders: What are we currently doing to teach the public? What are we planning to do to teach the public and are we going to collaborate with others to reach the goals? (Summary from each participant at table below ). Legal Aid: - Has a FAQ in both Spanish and English on eviction moratoriums and the rights and responsibilities of tenants/landlords - Has a handout for AB 2179 and AB 1482 on their website - Works with refugee organizations in SD, El Cajon, Arabic , Somalia, Farsi - Has done outreach to landlords - mostly done by email about County section 8 training and fair housing - Has printed materials like brochures in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Farsi and are put in libraries or office ACCE: - Has weekly know your rights training - created by legal aid - Has recurring zoom meetings weekly - Does door to door flyers - Works with housinghelpSDmonth - Information on legal providers and resources - Has information of programs expiring to let people know - SD eviction collaborative - Has had a few presentations in person about once a month in both Spanish and English - Helps tenants self-assert and establishes relationships with them. They encourage people to share personal testimonies and claim that it is effective to hear these stores because it motivates others - Outreach to landlords: don’t be the landlord who messes up due to ignorance of the law or other and loses a lot of legal funds because of it. Communicate potential costs for an attorney. - Legal Aid states to have an attorney before serving an eviction notice - Legal aid sends people to the CA Bar Association to provide some lawyers and legal advice 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 81 of 810 ATTACHMENT 2 PSAR: - Has on call lawyers to help people with counseling - Educates property managers and advises realtors - Collaborates with CSA San Diego to have regular fair housing workshops. Works with Monica Lopez at CSA San Diego - Has a blog, social media accounts (most use Facebook about 80% for the older demographic, average age is 55 years old, but Instagram is used for the younger demographic), YouTube channel, texting, etc. - Has about 40-50 FAQs on landlord/tenant relationships on their website - Has federal to state to local refers to attorney - ADA issues - federal and state laws - Hosts 3 property managers training a year with certified property managers - Work with conflict resolution (National Conflict Resolution Center incorp services) to help with mediation - Has mandatory mediations where the county subsidizes them, BUT still needs better advertising - Has community mediation NCRC - This program helps reach resolutions without going to court and is especially helpful in low cost issues - Online streams for fair housing workshops CSA San Diego: - Has an agency database of cases? - Outreach on tenant/landlord issues to let both know their rights and responsibilities - Has an outreach program with the outreach coordinator - Collaborates with other agencies that work with tenants and landlords - Housing counselors do follow ups - Has a hotline with a free toll number - Has languages in English, Spanish, Arabic - Has about 3000 cases a year - Works in the entire city of San Diego CA Apartment Association: - Has industry insights - Has fact sheets based on jurisdiction 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 82 of 810 ATTACHMENT 2 - Has webinars - Call # for landlords - Has a vendor database for legal services - Has a chat function - Only has these resources for memberships SDAR: - Requires membership - Information for owners and realtor agents Data Collection 10:50 to 11:20AM - How many times do people call? Track by unique calls - Household demographics (race, ethnicity, sex, veteran, disability, etc.) - Criminal allegation/records - How much do tenants/landlords already know their rights - Ask if people have been harassed and if it was told to the DA (harassment in terms of legal harassment not oh this person emails me a lot), What was the harassment? - Nature of complaint: harassment? Discrimination? - Requesting the # of evictions within the last 10 years - For landlords: if they remodeled the place, and what was the scope - For tenants: did you send a reasonable accommodation request? Do you know what a reasonable accommodation request is? - How much income goes to rent? - For Landlords: reasons to remodel, Did you obtain a permit? - For complexes/apartments: do they have any code violations - For tenants: did you contact the landlord with issues? If not, why? Afraid of retaliation? - Reasons for evictions - Landlords provides copies of notices (from evictions to rent hikes) to CSA San Diego - Require eviction notice to be provided to the city - Request from court # of evictions - Notify city when property to be sold - How was the eviction notice served (online, oral, etc) - Track rental increases - City requirement for landlord to provide info - Ask tenants how rent was increased Mechanisms for collecting data is not in place right now 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 83 of 810 ATTACHMENT 2 Wrap Up & Next Steps 11:20 to 11:30AM -Chula Vista Housing Division Comment Cards (provided to meeting attendees) Participants were provided with the opportunity to submit handwritten comments. o “Thank you for facilitating” o “It would be helpful to know exactly what CSA is collecting now to see what else should be collected” o “I think these meeting have produced excellent outcomes & changes. I think the city is heading in the right direction to balance opposing positions. – Jeremy Sine” -Emailed Comments (received after meeting) Molly Kirkland, Southern California Rental Housing Association was unable to join but submitted comments on the agenda. In terms of what my organization can provide: - Outreach to property owners and managers/management companies, both members and non-members. o Via our emails newsletters, website, public relations, social media and magazine. o Can also share information at classes and major events, such as our Trade Show. - Ability to share tenant facing information with members who can then share with their residents. (i.e. information flyers that housing providers can post or put in community newsletter) - Willing to host/co-host community/educational forums/webinars. We’ve done this with CSA is the past. Data Collection: - If tenant initiates contact, what you have listed is fine but I might also suggest… o Make sure when the documentation is received, the date of service and the date of termination are noted. (Many housing providers issue a “60-day notice” but with a termination date that is further out than 60 days. Legally, w hichever is later takes precedent. It’s important to know if housing providers are opting to provider residents with more time.) o Was relocation offered/provided? How much? (some housing providers offer more) o Is this the first Notice of Termination received? ▪ If no, explain. (quite often the housing provider has already given the resident extra time. They will rescind notices or re-notice with a later 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 84 of 810 ATTACHMENT 2 termination date. Again, it’s important to quantify that not everyone is simply getting a 60-day.) o Follow up details (was housing provider contacted? Legal Aid? Other?) o What was the situation of the housing provider? (are they selling due to a military relocation, financial hardship? For substantial remodel, how old in the property? Last time it had major updates?) o Was the case referred to mediation? Were the parties amendable? Detail outcomes, including refusal to participate, etc. o If anything, criminal was alleged, was the case referred to the City or DA? It’s important that more than just calls and reasons for the calls are collected. There are always more details to the story. A fair and balanced data collection is the only way to get a true picture of the environment as a whole. Otherwise, we are back where we started. With regard to collection of housing provider information, I know that some do call CSA for advice, but I imagine tenant calls are predominant. If a housing provider calls, they should not have to provide information about the entire property unless that is the question they have or reason they are calling. If it’s only about a single unit, only information about the unit should be asked of the provider. Some of the questions above could apply here too. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 85 of 810 RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT PROVISIONS STAKEHOLDER MEETING NOTES July 13, 2022 2:00PM-3:30PM City of Chula Vista City Hall, Building A - Executive Suite 103 Introductions/Attendees Stacey Kurz, City of Chula Vista, Housing Manager Anne Steinberg, City of Chula Vista, Communications Manager Gabriela Dow, City Consultant, NV5 Melanie Woods, CAA Jeremy Sine, SDAR Gil Vera, Legal Aid Robert Mansouri, Legal Aid Silvia Saldivar, ACCE Gabriel Guzman, ACCE Rich D’Ascoli, PSAR Olivia Galvez, SCRHA Update from Housing Staff 2:10 to 3:00PM Landlord & Tenant Survey Staff provided an overview of the Landlord & Tenant Survey that is currently out for completion to get a better understanding of recent market trends within the City by all property types. A specific question around noticing requirements for AB1482 was included. Follow up items: • City will provide a dropbox link to all of the marketing materials and the full survey for stakeholders. Request they use the marketing materials and survey link to email their members, post on social media, etc. • Staff will also follow up with the target sample size after the meeting. Overview of Changes to Ordinance Staff provided an overview of the comments that were heard at the May 17th Council meeting and provided how staff is being responsive, as follows: • Assess resources ongoing for Tenant/Landlord - Reorganize Housing Dept. – more resources; tenant/landlord issues; housing navigation – back to Council Aug. or Sept. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 86 of 810 • Develop outreach plan – how will we educate community. How quickly educate re: ordinance and ongoing. • Data collection – City take a closer look at what data will be maintained at City and CSA. o Ordinance to add data collection requirements. Landlord to report termination action to city. ▪ (Section 8 requires same day reporting when tenant is terminating). ▪ Some felt same business day or at same time language is too restrictive and may not be feasible. Three business days was proposed and all in attendance agreed that would be more suitable. ▪ Questions on how it will be submitted. Should have a variety of w ays: email, web form, paper, etc. o Mandatory cover sheet will be added to city requirement, from landlord with basic demographic info about number issued, how many vacancies remain, contact info for owner. ▪ Some suggested it would be better to have submittal requirements rather than a cover sheet. ▪ Suggest City be required to provide confirmation via email. • City developing administrative guidelines to include process around enforcement and voluntary form for residents when noticed (to make them aware of possible resources). • Long-term tenancy – Relocation, benefits, impact same for tenants no matter time in housing, and therefore ordinance updated for relocation benefits on day one of tenancy. o Relocation benefits: Demo, removal from market, substantial rehab - 2 months rent or 3 months rent disabled or elderly. Greater of the contracted rent or SAFMR (by zip code). • Any return to unit – requalification based on industry standards. First right refusal for tenant – but they have to qualify. o Clarify “industry standard” What is the bare minimum to rent unit? o Noticing period for requalification? Written as 30 days from landlord notice of available unit. • Government or court order (eminent domain) or family move-in relocation one-month rent. o Consider uninhabitable violations? Hazard issue? • Tenancy definitions - were already clarified in last version of ordinance. Comments from attendees: • Harassment issue should potentially be separated from ordinance and should also address both landlord and tenant need protections, clear definition of harassment, two tenants harassing each other. Additional input: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 87 of 810 o Focus on bad landlords and those who don’t know laws/regulations. o Tenant and landlord remedies. o Add protections for landlord (harassment). Education & Outreach 3:00 to 3:30PM Assuming the Ordinance is adopted and effective October 1, how do we educate and inform community? (group discussion) • Use common language – decide Tenants? Renters? • Standardize information • Survey responses (add notification option to sign up to get updates) • Additional information for stakeholders. • How do we work together so we all have the same understanding? How can landlords and tenants get feedback or information? • How to receive information and keep meeting? • How long to keep meeting? Check in meeting. • Send notice to City employees. • How is data to be used? Need to consider privacy and anonymized. How will it be shared? Add privacy info. • Contact those on Boards/Commissions. • Constant Contact email database. • Send info to landlord or tenant attorneys? • First right of refusal notification requirements for renting remodeled unit s. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 88 of 810 RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT PROVISIONS STAKEHOLDER MEETING NOTES Monday, August 22, 2022 1:30 - 3:00 p.m. Chula Vista City Hall, Building A – City Manager’s Conference Room #124 (In-Person and Virtual via Teams provided) Introductions/Attendees In-person: Stacey Kurz, City of Chula Vista, Housing Manager Anne Steinberg, City of Chula Vista, Communications Manager Mark Barnard, Management Analyst Gabriela Dow, City Consultant, Ardurra Melanie Woods, CAA Jeremy Sine, SDAR Gil Vera, Legal Aid Silvia Saldivar, ACCE Jose Lopez, ACCE Rich D’Ascoli, PSAR Olivia Galvez, SCRHA BIA Virtually: Simon Silva, Deputy City Attorney Leah Simon-Weisberg, Legal Director ACCE Institute Updates from Housing Staff & Stakeholders Staff provided a quick summary of the Landlord & Tenant Survey results indicating that responses were received from 89 landlords and 277 tenants. The major item of note was the average rents reported were lower than the HUD Small Area Fair Market Rents. Draft Residential Landlord & Tenant Ordinance Staff provided an overview of the restructuring of the document by outlining the table of contents in the Ordinance. They further provided an update on the main issues raised at the May 17th Council meeting and how they had been addressed in the latest version of the ordinance. Comments from participants during run through of ordinance or via email after: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 89 of 810 Section 9.65.030 Definitions - “Housing Service”: • The way this is written seems to indicate that all these things are automatically a right. Some are under the law. However, many aren’t and tenants might think they automatically get parking, can have as many people in the unit as they want, or can have a pet, etc. • Suggest revising to refer to the existing requirements in state law and “and any other benefits explicitly agreed upon in the rental agreement.” That would capture things like parking and pets, if allowed. Here is a link to the state handbook, page 48 is where the habitability/housing provider requirements list starts: https://wFhousww.courts.ca.gov/documents/California-Tenants- Guide.pdf • There may be other ways to alter so it doesn’t imply all those things are rights simply based on “use or occupancy.” Section 9.65.030 Definitions - “Owner”: • “…and includes a predecessor in interest to the owner.” Can you explain what this pertains to and is trying to accomplish? Section 9.65.040 Tenancies Not Subject – C.2: • MRL tenancies need the exemption notice as well? Guessing the city requires us to notice of the rent control ordinance so is the city looking for an additional notice of exemption? Mobilehomes are clearly exempt from the definition of “Residential Rental Unit” and the chapter but want clarity on the city’s intentions on the noticing. • Clarify whether you need to provide notice if you do not renew the lease. State law may have had a 30-day notice requirement from implementation. Section 9.65.040 Tenancies Not Subject – F: • Is this to account specifically for the City’s Short-Term rental ordinance? Just curious how it differs from the existing state law exemption for “Transient and tourist hotel occupancy as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 1940.” Section 9.65.050 Harassment & Retaliation – 11: • Concerned that this could create issues for someone already involved in an Unlawful Detainer. Counsel usually recommends that rent not be accepted once a case is filed, especially partial rent. If one accepts partial rent, then they would have to start the process all over. Starting with the 3- day to pay or quit, refile the case, so on and so forth. It hardly seems fair to turn that practice into something that a tenant can use to weaponize a harassment complaint. • Perhaps this could be re-worded: Refuse to acknowledge receipt of a Tenant's lawful rent payment; excluding situations where an Unlawful Detainer or other civil suit is pending that could be impacted by the acceptance of rent. Section 9.65.060 Just Cause – 2: • Identify time period of 30 days. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 90 of 810 Section 9.65.060 Just Cause – 10: • Define using Los Angeles. Concern about application to tenants/agents that are receiving a discount on rent. Define as 100% housing compensation without paying rent. o Suggest caution. The state requires a resident manager in a complex with 16 or more units. The requirement to have them as employees is complicated and costly. Even if they only work a few hours a week, they are classified as employees meaning the owner has to pay work comp, etc. And while the “free apartment” was mentioned, the owner/manager still has to track hours and make sure they are properly crediting the minimum wage against any credit. If a resident manager is having their employment agreement terminated and therefore their tenancy, it is likely because they failed to perform their duties as defined. Hence it being an at-fault cause. I looked at the LA ordinance and there are quite a few limitations on the applicability of protections for resident managers. It’s also a rent control jurisdiction. Section 9.65.070 Requirements upon Termination – B.1.c: • Clarify that relocation is required from day one of tenancy. Short-Term Outreach, Wrap Up & Next Steps Staff provided an overview of a Short-Term Outreach and Education Plan per prior stakeholder meetings to prepare for Ordinance Implementation. Long-Term Outreach and Educational Campaign would be established after adoption. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 91 of 810 ATTACHMENT 3 COMPARISON OF STATE LAW FOR HARASSMENT & NO-FAULT TERMINATIONS OF TENANCY AND LOCALLY PROPOSED PROTECTIONS IMPACTED HOUSING TYPES IN CHULA VISTA State - Civil Code 1942.5 Chula Vista State Chula Vista State Chula Vista State Chula Vista State Chula Vista State - Government Code 1942.5 Chula Vista Single-family owned by business entity* Prohibits retaliatory evictions due to a tenant's exercise of a legal right. Adds 12 harassment/ retaliatory behaviors. Defines Substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) permit is required; and (3) necessary to be vacant for least 30 days. Defines substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) improvements $40 or more per square foot; (3) permit is required; and (4) necessary to be vacant for more than sixty (60) days. Tenancy < 12 months = 30 days Tenancy ≥ 12 months = 60 days Consistent with State Law 1 month contracted rent From day one of tenancy, one (1) month of actual then in effect contract rent under Tenant’s lease. None Consistent with state law None Consistent with state law Single-family + ADU with both occupied by tenants* Prohibits retaliatory evictions due to a tenant's exercise of a legal right. Adds 12 harassment/ retaliatory behaviors. Defines Substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) permit is required; and (3) necessary to be vacant for least 30 days. Defines substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) improvements $40 or more per square foot; (3) permit is required; and (4) necessary to be vacant for more than sixty (60) days. Tenancy < 12 months = 30 days Tenancy ≥ 12 months = 60 days Consistent with State Law 1 month contracted rent From day one of tenancy, one (1) month of actual then in effect contract rent under Tenant’s lease. None Consistent with state law None Consistent with state law Duplex with both units occupied by tenants* Prohibits retaliatory evictions due to a tenant's exercise of a legal right. Adds 12 harassment/ retaliatory behaviors. Defines Substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) permit is required; and (3) necessary to be vacant for least 30 days. Defines substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) improvements $40 or more per square foot; (3) permit is required; and (4) necessary to be vacant for more than sixty (60) days. Tenancy < 12 months = 30 days Tenancy ≥ 12 months = 60 days Consistent with State Law 1 month contracted rent From day one of tenancy, one (1) month of actual then in effect contract rent under Tenant’s lease. None Consistent with state law None Consistent with state law Complex with 3 or more units* Prohibits retaliatory evictions due to a tenant's exercise of a legal right. Adds 12 harassment/ retaliatory behaviors. Defines Substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) permit is required; and (3) necessary to be vacant for least 30 days. Defines substantial remodel as: (1) system is being replaced or substantially modified; (2) improvements $40 or more per square foot; (3) permit is required; and (4) necessary to be vacant for more than sixty (60) days. Tenancy < 12 months = 30 days Tenancy ≥ 12 months = 60 days Consistent with State Law 1 month contracted rent From day one of tenancy, greater of: (1) 2 months contracted rent or 3 months elderly/disabled; or (2) 2 months SAFMR or 3 months elderly/disabled. None Notify owner within 30 days of forwarding address Owner notifies with minimum criteria for qualifying None If re-rented within 2 years, greater of: (1) 6 months contracted rent; or (2) 6 months SAFMR *AB1482 (State Tenant Protection Act of 2019) exempts properties less than 15 years of age. Mobilehome Homeowner Mobilehome Tenant (AB1482 applies to tenants of mobilehomes) Residential Rental Unit alienable separate from the title to any other dwelling unit that is not owned by a business entity Shared housing (“roommate” of owner) Single-family, where Owner occupies & rents or leases no more than two units or bedrooms, including, an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit Single-family + ADU w/ owner occupying one unit Duplex where Owner occupies one unit Deed restricted affordable housing Hotel Rentals of 30 days or less Medical facilities and care facilities Residential Property or Dormitories owned by the City Noticing for No-Fault Demolition/Ellis Act/Substantial Remodel/Owner or Family-Move-In Relocation Assistance for No-Fault Demolition/Ellis Act/Substantial Remodel/Owner or Family-Move-In Noticing for No-Fault Demolition/Ellis Act/Substantial Remodel/Owner or Family-Move-In Penalty for Market Re-Entry after Ellis Act/Removal from Market EXEMPTED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES FROM CHULA VISTA ORDINANCE Anti-Harassment Substantial Remodel 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 92 of 810 Attachment 4 Chula Vista Tenant Housing Education Plan DRAFT V5 – September 14, 2022 Overview The City of Chula Vista is compiling updated information and understanding of tenant and landlord experiences via stakeholder meetings and surveys. The data, collected in English and Spanish, is focused on single family home owners to gauge what they currently know about landlord/tenant rights/responsibilities. In addition, an education and engagement campaign will increase awareness and understanding of the pending housing provider and tenant ordinance. Partner stakeholder groups and community leaders have been engaged to provide and receive timely updates and discuss ordinance framework and content over the past few months. City staff and an independent facilitator is providing follow up after each meeting to collaboratively discuss the latest version of the ordinance for review by key stakeholders and organizations. The ordinance is expected to be presented to the Chula Vista City Council at the September 27 Council meeting. Key Dates Stakeholder Meeting #1: June 2, 2022 Create Education Graphics: July 5, 2022 Survey Conducted: July 6 – July 26, 2022 Updated information on the website (English/Spanish): July 12, 2022 Publicizing Survey to the Public: Starting July 15, 2022 Mass Email #1 / Newsletters (25k subscribers): July 15, 2022 Stakeholder Meeting #2: July 13, 2022 Stakeholder Meeting #3: August 22, 2022 Presentation at Council: September 13, 2022 Create Summary / Fact Sheet (English/Spanish): Finalize _____ Mass Email #2 / Newsletters: City Distribute ________ Create Partner Toolkit: _______________________ Education Materials Development (video, more graphics, flyers, etc): ___ 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 93 of 810 Partner Education and Outreach Resources What are we currently doing to teach the public; planning to do to teach the public and can we collaborate with others to reach mutual goals? PLATFORMS AACE CA Apartment Assn (Membership Based) CSA San Diego Legal Aid (Eng/Span) PSAR SDAR (Membership Based) SCRHA Educational material development and distribution Info on legal providers, resources. Fact Sheets based on jurisdiction. Industry insights. Services in English, Spanish, Arabic. Approx 3,000 cases/year in entire city of San Diego. Fact Sheets – based on jurisdiction laws. FAQ in both Spanish and English on eviction moratoriums and the rights and responsibilities of tenants/landlords. Website FAQ including re: Eviction Moratorium Handout – AB 1482 – Just Cause AB 2179 – COVID 19 Protections. Materials for refugee orgs – SD & El Cajon – Arabic, Somali, Farsi. Approx 40-50 FAQs on landlord/tenant relationships on their website (federal to state to local refers to attorney, ADA issues, federal and state laws). Information for owners and realtor agents. Request from court 3 of eviction Notify City when property to be sold Require eviction notice be provided to City. Outreach to property owners and managers/management companies, both members and non- members via our emails newsletters, website, public relations, social media and magazine. Contact Database Vendor database for legal services. Agency database of cases. Mechanism for collecting data not in place right now. Trainings / Classes / Presentations / Events Weekly Know Your Rights training - Created with Legal Aid Covers AB 1482 & AB 2179. Zoom meetings weekly. Had a few presentations in person about once a month in Webinars. Fair Housing70 Presentations FY 2022. County Section 8 Training. Outreach to landlords mostly done by email about County Online streams for fair housing workshops. Three property manager trainings/year. Can also share information at classes and major events, such as our Trade Show. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 94 of 810 both Spanish and English Starting in- person – once a month. section 8 training and fair housing. Training – Certified Property Manager. ADA issues - federal and state laws. Phone Support Call # for landlords. Chat function. Hotline with a free toll number. Social Media / Digital Platforms HousingHelpSD. Chat function (on website). Only has this resource for memberships. Has a blog, social media accounts (most use facebook about 80% for the older demographic, average age is 55 years old, but Instagram is used for the younger demographic), youtube channel, texting, etc. Push texting? PSAR – Blog; social media; member Facebook – 800; stream video, YouTube, texting, MLS 80% on FB – average age = 55 IG for younger demographic. Languages Languages in English, Spanish, Arabic. Materials for refugee orgs – SD & El Cajon – Arabic, Somali, Farsi. Legal referrals Has on call lawyers to help people with counseling. Collaboration SD Eviction Collaborative. Works with housinghelpSDmonth Works with National Conflict Resolution Center: incorporate services to help Collaborates with CSA San Diego to have regular fair housing workshops. Works with Willing to host/co-host community/educational forums/webinars. We’ve done this with CSA is the past. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 95 of 810 with mediation. Has mandatory mediations where the county subsidizes them, BUT still needs better advertising. Also community mediation NCRC (program helps reach resolutions without going to court and is especially helpful in low cost issues). Monica Lopez at CSA San Diego. Works with conflict resolution (National Conflict Resolution Center incorp services) to help with mediation. Community mediation NCRC. Mandatory mediations where the county subsidizes them, BUT needs better advertising. Neighborhood Outreach Door to Door – leave flyers. Outreach coordinators re tenant/landlord issues to let both know their rights and responsibilities. Housing counselors do follow ups. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 96 of 810 SUBJECT AREAS AACE CA Apartment Assn (Membership Based) CSA San Diego Legal Aid (Eng/Span) PSAR SDAR (Membership Based) SCRHA Tenant Outreach Financial Resource: Utility, Rental, Chicano Federation Program Expiration Information. Help tenant self-assert Personal Testimony Printed materials like brochures in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Farsi are put in libraries or office. Newsletters? Fair Housing How many times people call? Track by unique calls. Ability to share tenant facing information with members who can then share with their residents. (i.e. information flyers that housing providers can post or put in community newsletter). Landlord Outreach “Don’t let this happen to me” outreach Don’t be the landlord who messes up. Get an attorney (landlord). Communicate potential costs for attorney. Or legal resources. Free consultation. How to reach single home landlords? Printed materials – English, Spanish + Vietnamese, Farsi Libraries, digital copies. Tenants & Landlords – April Fair Housing. Legal Aid Collect data – Notices; demographics – HH#; veteran; disability, gender; race/ethnicity; Address; contact; gender pronouns. Have you been harassed? How resolved? What was issue? What is currently happening Nature of complaint? Harassment? Discrimination Important to collect demographics What type of harassment? Tenant – have you ever contacted code enforcement? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 97 of 810 Do you contact landlord re: issues? If not, why? Are you afraid of retaliation? Property Managers Hosts 3 property managers training a year with certified property managers. How was eviction notice served? Track rental increase. Have you had your rent increased? Landlord provide written notice? Do you know how much time to provide notice? How long in CV? Have you been asked to move out? Complexes – code violations? Open cases? Reason for remodel? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 98 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 99 of 810 From: webmaster@chulavistaca.gov <webmaster@chulavistaca.gov> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2022 12:52 AM To: Mayor <mayor@chulavistaca.gov>; Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Contact Us - Notification for Mayor Casillas Salas A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted. Form Name: Mayor Casillas Salas Date & Time: 10/24/2022 12:51 AM Response #: 1723 Submitter ID: 105676 IP address: 68.8.171.227 Time to complete: 5 min. , 48 sec. Survey Details Page 1 Please feel free to contact us with any comments or questions by filling out the form below. First Name Dolores Last Name Sexton Email Address Comments To: Mayor Mary Salas and Chula Vista City Council Members I am once again reaching out to this body to ensure that you will uphold your oaths to the people of Chula Vista, and that you will follow the Constitution of the State of California as well as the Constitution of the United States of America. Please note the following, and make sure you understand the full meaning of our rights as citizens of this city, state and country, these rights apply to you, me, and everyone else who lives in this country. CODE TEXT CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION - CONS ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS [SECTION 1 - SEC. 32] Article 1 adopted 1879. ) SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 6.2 - Sexton - Received 10/24/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 100 of 810 defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. Sec. 1 added Nov. 5, 1974, by Proposition 7. Resolution Chapter 90, 1974.) This article has not changed, and I have not provided my consent for the city council, or the mayor all of whom are paid public servants of the people of Chula Vista whether "elected" or selected, to over reach in their perceived authority to interfere in any way with my property or my rights to do or not do what I deem appropriate with it. The job of the mayor and city council is to act on behalf of their constituents and to follow moral and ethical standards to ensure that our rights are protected. The once again proposed Tenant Protection Ordinance (TPO) is up for approval. Thankfully there are many informed citizens that care about out city and about our rights, and there has been, and there will continue to be opposition to this type of unsubstantiated, arbitrary, and overreaching ordinance in our city. It was initiated by a referral by Mayor Mary Salas at a City Council meeting on Oct 26, 2021. The basis for this referral has no solid standing. The data being used is from 2011 to 2015, a lot has changed since then in our demographics, selecting data that aligns with a narrative cannot be utilized in a factual serious discussion about what is really needed in our city. Where is the data for at least the last three years that will tell the real story? I requested in my written objection in May 2022, that the council obtain valid current data for their proposed ordinance. I also pointed out that the only group that supposedly was asking for such regulation was a pro TPO paid group organized by Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment or ACCE (formerly Acorn). ACCE was a coalition leader for Proposition W, the rent control issue in National City that was defeated in Nov 2018. I personally attended the May 17, 2022 council meeting, and saw members of this special interests group show up at the city council meeting all in yellow t-shirts being coached and organized. The leader made scripted comments, and had some of the group members pretending to be affected citizens, and frankly making obvious false statements, basically actors, trying to drive a narrative to support the supposed reasons for this ordinance. It was shameful to watch these people being used. How can we possibly believe that the city council is doing this with good intentions? In addition, attributing some of the reason for this proposal to a state of emergency, that was created by the actions taken and pushed by the Chula Vista City Council, and the State of California, should also disqualify this proposal as circumstantial and advantageous to the city council. The leadership of the City of Chula vista could have taken the right actions to preserve jobs, and to keep people informed and educated, we could have avoided most of the negative impacts to our local economies that are stated in the reasons for the proposed ordinance. Instead you have chosen as many of our cities, to take the federal dollars, lock up their citizens, close down businesses, and force people to fear for their lives and their livelihood, by spreading the fear porn and propaganda for more than two years and counting. And now you want to "solve" the problems you purposely created (never letting an emergency go to waste), conveniently providing a "solution". This raises a lot of eyebrows frankly, the playbook is getting very obvious to those that are paying attention, and more and more are paying attention now. It's time to stop the façade, I think that many of us see clearly that the ordinance has nothing to do with helping people, its about controlling people. We do not consent, we will not consent to your tactics, a nd I hope that you realize that we are all paying close attention to your motives and actions. We will be more critical of our future city leadership, I think we have learned a difficult lesson, by not paying closer attention to who was deciding on our behalf and whether or not their intentions were good. In the near future we will fill these seats with people that care about Chula Vista, about its future, and about really making a positive difference in the lives of those that live here. So disappointed and saddened by the state of our nation and of our city. You all could have done the right thing, but I suspect you will continue to push your dictated agenda, you should expect that we will push back. The proposed tenant ordinance is unconstitutional, redundant, has no valid credible statistical basis, is an insult to the hard working people of Chula Vista, and a Written Communications Item 6.2 - Sexton - Received 10/24/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 101 of 810 blatant attempt to make property owners into criminals, if they don't play by your arbitrary and ambiguous rules. Thank you for the time you have invested in reading my objections to this proposal. Please consider doing the right thing for your constituents. Respectfully, Chris & Dolores Sexton Citizens of Chula Vista Thank you, City of Chula Vista This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email. Written Communications Item 6.2 - Sexton - Received 10/24/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 102 of 810 From: Jose Lopez < Sent: Monday, October 24, 2022 7:50:31 PM To: acardenas@chulavistaca.gov <acardenas@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Suggested amendments for Chula Vista TPO Dear Council member Cardenas, Sorry for sending this until now. Thank you for trying to help protect tenants from No Fault evictions. Here are some recommended amendments we would like to see, in order to improve the TPO. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best, Jose Lopez Director ACCE San Diego Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 6.2 - Lopez - Received 10/25/22 mailto:jlopez@calor ganize.org mailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.gov 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 103 of 810 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 9.65 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE I. IMPOSE AN UNEQUIVOCAL RIGHT TO RETURN AT THE SAME RENT FOLLOWING ALL NO-FAULT EVICTIONS, INCLUDING SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION. Section 9.65.030 (Residential Rental Complex definition) –Delete in its entirety. Section 9.65.070(B)(1) –Alter as follows: 1.No Fault Terminations Tenancy in Unit in a Residential Rental Complex. When an Owner terminates a Tenancy of a Residential Rental Unit in a Residential Rental Complex for No-Fault Just Cause, the Owner shall provide notice and relocation assistance to the Tenant as follows: Section 9.65.070(B)(1)(a)(iii) –Alter as follows: iii.Notice of Right to Receive Future Offer Return.The Tenant’s right to receive an offer to renew the Tenancy on the same terms in the event that the Residential Rental Unit is offered again for rent or lease for residential purposes within two (2)ten (10)years of the date the Tenant vacated the Residential Rental Unit was withdrawn from the rental market, and that to exercise such right, the Tenant: (a) must notify the Owner in writing within sixty (60)thirty (30) days of the termination notice vacating the Residential Rental Unit of such desire to consider an offer to renew the Tenancy in the event that the Residential Rental Unit is offered again for rent or lease for residential purposes; (b) furnish the Owner with an address or email address to which that offer is to be directed; (c) and advise the Owner if they want the offer directed to a different address or email address at any time of a change of address to which an offer is to be directed. Section 9.65.070(B)(2) –Delete in its entirety. Section 9.65.070(C)(5) –alter as follows: 5. If the Residential Rental Unit in a Residential Rental Complex is offered for rent or lease for residential purposes within two (2)ten (10)years of the date the Tenancy was terminated Tenant vacated the Residential Rental Unit, the Owner shall first offer the unit for rent or lease to the Tenant displaced from that unit by the No Fault Just Cause termination if the Tenant (a) advised the Owner in writing within sixty (60)thirty (30) days of the termination notice of the Tenant vacating the Residential Rental Unit of the Tenant’s desire to consider an offer to renew the Tenancy; and (b) furnished the Owner with an address or email address to which that offer is to be directed.The Owner shall offer to renew the tenancy on the same terms in effect at the time of termination.The Owner shall have the right to Written Communications Item 6.2 - Lopez - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 104 of 810 screen the Tenant using industry accepted methods and shall communicate such minimum screening criteria in the offer for the new Tenancy, subject to the terms of any attendant Administrative regulations. II. IMPLEMENT ALL OF THE ELLIS ACT’S AUTHORIZED PROTECTIONS. Section 9.65.070(C)(6)– Delete in its entirety Section 8.65.075 – Add Section below: A.System of Control on Rents.The city of Chula Vista adopts California Civil Code section 1947.12 and Penal Code section 396 as its local system of control on rents. This section does not impose any rent limitations on Landlords that are not already applicable under state law. Ellis Act Regulations – Chula Vista Should Adopt a comprehensive Ellis Act Implementation Ordinance. ACCE provided language for an Ellis Ordinance on May 10, 2022. The City’s Ellis regulations should, at minimum, adopt all protections authorized by the Ellis Act. III. MANDATE THAT AN OWNER OR RELATIVE MUST INTEND TO LIVE IN THE UNIT FOR THREE YEARS TO UTILIZE THE OWNER MOVE-IN CAUSE FOR EVICTION. Section 9.65.060 (C)(1) -Alter as follows: 1.Intent to Occupy by Owner or Family Member.The tenancy is terminated on the basis that the Owner or Owner’s Family Member intends to occupy the Residential Rental Unit. For leases entered into on or after July 1, 2020, Intent to occupy by Owner or Family Member shall only be a No Fault Just Cause basis for termination if the Tenant agrees, in writing, to the termination, or if a provision of the lease allows the owner to terminate the lease if the Owner of Family Member unilaterally decided to occupy the residential real property.The Owner or their Family Member must in good faith intend to move into the unit within ninety (90) days and occupy the Residential Rental Unit for three consecutive years as their principal residence. IV. PROHIBIT EVICTIONS FOR FAILING TO ABIDE BY UNAGREED TO LEASE TERMS. Section 9.65.060(B)(2) –Alter as follows: 2. A breach of material term of the lease, as described in paragraph (3) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure, including, but not limited to, violation of a provision of the lease after being issued a written notice to correct the violation. For purposes of this subdivision, a term of a lease that was unilaterally imposed by the Landlord after the commencement of the tenancy shall not be considered Written Communications Item 6.2 - Lopez - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 105 of 810 a material term of the lease” unless the change to the lease was required by law or was accepted in writing by the Tenant after being advised in writing that the Tenant need not voluntarily agree to the change in tenancy. V. ENACT STRONG REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS, INCLUDING MANDATORY TRIPLE DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY’S FEES. Section 9.65.080(D)(1) –Alter as follows: 1. Civil Action.An aggrieved Tenant may institute a civil action for injunctive relief, direct money damages, and any other relief allowed by law, including the assessment of civil penalties in the amount of no less than $2,000 and no more than $5,000 per violation per day, or three times the Tenant’s actual damages including damages for mental or emotional distress), whichever is greater.If the aggrieved Tenant is Elderly or Disabled, additional civil penalties of up to $5,000 per violation per day may be assessed at the discretion of the court.This remedy is not exclusive A Tenant may also pursue damages as set forth in Section 9.65.070(C)(6)any attendant administrative regulations. The statute of limitations for all remedies in this subdivision shall be three (3) years. Irreparable harm shall be presumed through violation of this chapter. Section 9.65.080(D)(3) –Alter as follows: 3.Attorney’s Fees.The court may shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to a party prevailing tenant who prevails in any action described in paragraphs 1 and 2 above.The court may award a prevailing owner reasonable attorney’s fees if the Tenant’s action was devoid of merit and brought in bad faith. Costs shall be awarded according to state law. Please note that the code of civil procedure governs unlawful detainer proceedings. As such, local ordinances cannot prescribe attorney’s fees in unlawful detainers.1 For this reason we suggest removing this remedy from the ordinance. 1 Larson v. City & Cty. of S.F., 192 Cal. App. 4th 1263, 1297 (2011) Written Communications Item 6.2 - Lopez - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 106 of 810 Written Communications Item 6.2 - Kuta - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 107 of 810 Written Communications Item 6.2 - Kuta - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 108 of 810 From: Victor Cao < Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 1:50 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann <jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Jill Galvez jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla <spadilla@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas acardenas@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Kerry Bigelow <KBigelow@chulavistaca.gov>; CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov>; Melanie Woods <Stacey Kurz <SKurz@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: CAA Oppose Item 6.2 Tenant Protection Ordinance Mayor Salas and Members of City Council, CAA has summarized significant legal, operational, and procedural issues with the proposed Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance in the attached letter. CAA recommends that Chula Vista City Council reject the Tenant Protection Ordinance. I would appreciate if the city clerk could enter CAA’s opposition letter into the public record for Item 6.2 docketed for the October 25, 2022 City Council meeting. Melanie Woods, CAA’s San Diego Vice President of Public Affairs, is currently out on leave. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you have any questions about CAA’s concerns. Respectfully, Victor Cao Senior Vice President, Local Public Affairs California Apartment Association vcao@caanet.org 949-474-1411 Questions about COVID-19: Visit our Resource Page CAA Services: Events and Education Insurance Tenant Screening Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 6.2 - Cao - Received 10/25/22 mailto:vcao@c aanet.org mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:jmccann@chula vistaca.govmailto:jmgalvez@chula vistaca.gov mailto:spadilla@chula vistaca.govmailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:KBigelow@chula vistaca.gov mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.govmailto:mwoods@c aanet.org mailto:SKurz@chula vistaca.gov mailto:vca o@caanet .orgmailto:vcao@ caanet.org https:// caanet.org/ coronavirus- resources-for- navigating-the- outbreak/ https:// caanet.org/ calendar/list/ https:// caanet .org/ produc ts- servic es/ insura nce/ https:// caanet.org/ products- services/ screening/ 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 109 of 810 California Apartment Association 3349 Michelson Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92612 October 25, 2022 Mayor Salas City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Oppose Item 6.2 Tenant Protection Ordinance Mayor Salas & Members of the Chula Vista City Council: The California Apartment Association (CAA) remains opposed to the proposed Tenant Protection Ordinance (“TPO”). CAA is the nation’s largest statewide trade association representing owners, investors, developers, managers, and suppliers of rental housing. Our membership is diverse representing individual "mom-and-pop" owners of rental housing to the largest apartment operators throughout San Diego County and California. Our membership provides over 70,000 rental homes across San Diego County. As it has been already stated, the State of California has been heralded for having the “strongest tenant protections in the nation” through the adoption of AB 1482 (Chiu) in 2019. This legislation established a statewide, consistent standard to protect renters from excessive rent increases and arbitrary evictions. Establishing new laws and policies will only create inconsistencies for landlords, tenants, and courts across the state. CAA has previously held constructive discussions with city staff on methods to enhance landlord and tenant’s understanding of their rights and responsibilities, but a year has gone by without any meaningful effort towards proactive education efforts. Recognizing significant legal, operational, and procedural issues with this ordinance, CAA recommends the Chula Vista City Council reject the TPO for reasons including, but not limited to, the reasons outlined in this letter. 1. The definition of substantial rehabilitation is $40 per square foot, which does not include planning, engineering, or insurance related costs as part of the valuation. While the valuation was derived by the city’s building department analysis of permit activity, it is also important to recognize that the city’s housing stock is over 40 years old. Historical permit activity may be biased towards new construction and/or projects that are not representative of complex rehabilitations of aging multifamily properties. proceed with amendments. 2. Prior versions of the TPO limited relocation assistance to tenants who have established at least one-year of tenancy. In the current version, no-fault relocation assistance has been expanded to all tenants (e.g. new residents who do not have an established tie to Chula Written Communications Item 6.2 - Cao - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 110 of 810 2 Vista’s community or new residents from another state). CAA has several member testimonials about how relocation assistance is ridden with fraud and abuse in cities like Los Angeles and Alameda where such poorly constructed laws exist. 3. The ordinance stipulates that an owner or their family member can only move into their own property if the tenant agrees in writing prior to the termination or had agreed to it as a condition of the lease. This creates a considerable burden to an owner who is experiencing an emergency. Not only does an owner carry the trauma and expense of caring for a loved one in an emergency, but the City would then require additional money be paid to relocate a tenant; money that could be otherwise used for ongoing care. The City puts the owner in the position of calculating the health and displacement of their own family member against the financial and litigation risk involved with having to relocate a tenant. CAA encourages City Council to recognize that there are circumstances where owners make best decision to prioritize their loved ones over others they have no relation to. There are unique circumstances where ordinance unreasonably interferes into the familial obligations and property rights of owners. 4. The Reporting Requirements in Section 9.65.060(F) of the ordinance provides a backdoor and blank check for an invasion of privacy for both the owner and tenant. The TPO does not have any explicit reporting requirements. Instead, the TPO delegates authority to city staff and defers the development of such requirements without explicit approval of the city council. Reporting requirements under this scenario requirements may change without much notice and owners could be held in violation for failing to meet arbitrary requirements and deadlines. CAA requests City Council decline to entertain the Tenant Protection Ordinance until specific reporting requirements are explicitly written out and are available for public inspection. Consideration of City’s Private Vendor Survey Data and Methodology is Problematic The city conducted the July 2022 renter and stakeholder survey inappropriately. On July 14, 2022 city staff requested that various trade associations send an online survey on the city’s behalf. The administration of the survey was a disingenuous and the effort towards stakeholder outreach was a veiled attempt to validate the city’s presumptions about substantial remodels and evictions. The administration of the survey was highly questionable. The survey only contained biased, predetermined multiple-choice questions. The vendor relied on their own internet-based platform, SurveySavvy. Independent consumers and reviewers have scored the vendor’s platform, SurveySavvy, a 1.8 out of 5 stars and several reviewers alleged they were scammed.1 Lastly, the survey sample size was clearly flawed and not representative of Chula Vista or rental housing organizations quoted in the research report. For example, respondents who have no business interest or established residency in Chula Vista were able to take the survey. The survey was clearly susceptible to manipulation. CAA did not distribute the survey due to its poor design and lack of stakeholder on developing useful questions. Had CAA been properly consulted, the survey would have included the ability of 1 Adkins, Tonia, Stephanie Galloway, and Julie Kelley. “Surveysavvy Is Rated ‘Poor’ with 1.8 / 5 on Trustpilot.” Trustpilot, August 26, 2022. https://www.trustpilot.com/review/surveysavvy.com. Written Communications Item 6.2 - Cao - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 111 of 810 3 owners to state the purpose of substantial remodels or renovations, project cost and/or financial burden, or other relevant information. Frustrated participants lacked any ability to provide any meaningful feedback in their own words. The city has no need to rely on private vendors to manufacture data when ample public data was already available. City, County, State, and Federal Data is Available to Make Informed Policy Decisions The City of Chula Vista has meaningful and relevant data documented in its 2021-2029 Housing Element. The Housing Element stated that CSA San Diego had ample funding of nearly $300,000 to carry out investigations and other enforcement activities to prevent or eliminate discriminatory housing practices” (page AE-2). While CSA San Diego has reported an average of 264 cases annually over the past three years, the City’s Housing Element highlights that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development only found 29 harassment cases specific to Chula Vista in a five- year period (2014-2019). To put into context, harassment allegations in Chula Vista amounted to 1 in 2,733 households. In other words, a confirmed incidence of harassment is less than one percent of all households in Chula Vista. By comparison, there were nine times more incidents of a person being hit by lightning in the entire United States than a Chula Vista resident being a victim of housing-related harassment. According to reporting by CalMatters, evictions throughout San Diego County have been on the decline since 2010.2 CAA’s assertion, backed by actual eviction filings, is that 1 in 113 households in San Diego County experienced an eviction. This analysis is backed by a CalMatters data set, which contained exactly 9,230 case files requested from San Diego County courts and comparing them to over 1.3 million households that exist in the county. Whereas the city’s vendor is reliant on a poorly assembled extrapolations, Chula Vista City Council has the ability to consider facts. Reports of substantial rehabilitation are equally as low. The 2019 United States Census found that 48% of Chula Vista’s housing stock is over 40 years of age and yet, less than 70 multifamily properties underwent substantial rehabilitation over the last reporting period.3 Proponents of the Tenant Protection Ordinance have volleyed wild allegations against rental housing owners’ use of substantial rehabilitation with no evidence. Proponents rely on anecdotes that are still unverified and demand that the city to pass draconian housing laws. Small mom-and-pop owners are unlikely to spend in excess of $40 per square foot, pay relocation fees, and be expected to navigate overly complicated eviction procedures in order to make improvements to their property. Putting up such regulatory barriers will only exacerbate reinvestment into Chula Vista’s aging housing stock. The fact is that city, county, state, and federal data shows there has never been an epidemic of harassment or evictions based on substantial rehabilitation. Conclusion At prior City Council meetings, Councilmembers expressed concerns about increasing rents, the financial hardship of residents and a desire to address the bad actors. The proposed Tenant Protection Ordinance does not address any of the concerns in any substantial way. Instead, the proposed ordinance would (1) inhibit any substantial investment that improves the quality of life for 2 Matt Levin, “A California Housing Crisis Mystery: Rents Are Way up This Decade, but Eviction Filings Are Way Down,” CalMatters, December 22, 2019, https://calmatters.org/projects/california-eviction-filings-up-housing-crisis-mystery/. 3 Stacey Kurz, “Ordinance: Consideration of Establishing Residential Landlord and Tenant Provisions,” Ordinance: Consideration of Establishing Residential Landlord and Tenant Provisions § (2022), https://pub- chulavista.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=19446. Written Communications Item 6.2 - Cao - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 112 of 810 4 tenants and updates the City’s aging stock and (2) penalize innocent activities often part of normal property management operations with excessive criminal and civil penalties against its own taxpayers. Adoption of the ordinance would discourage ownership, development, and maintenance of rental housing, putting renters and quality housing at-risk in the long-term. The city had an opportunity to educate tenants and owners about the abundance of existing laws for over a year. Instead, the city has squandered time and resources in what is the epitome of “a solution in search of a problem.” For these reasons, CAA opposes the proposed ordinance and strongly encourages you to vote NO. Respectfully, Victor Cao Senior Vice President, Local Public Affairs Written Communications Item 6.2 - Cao - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 113 of 810 From: Molly Kirkland < Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2022 2:56 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann <jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Jill Galvez jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla <spadilla@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas acardenas@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Glen Googins <GGoogins@chulavistaca.gov>; CityManager <CityManager@chulavistaca.gov>; Housing Advisory Commission <HAC@chulavistaca.gov>; Stacey Kurz <SKurz@chulavistaca.gov>; Richard D'Ascoli <George Ching < Subject: PSAR/SCRHA Letter - Residential Landlord & Tenant Ordinance Hello, On behalf of the Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS (PSAR) and the Southern California Rental Housing Association (SCRHA), I am submitting the attached letter regarding the pending Residential Landlord & Tenant Ordinance. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact our organizations. Thank you, Molly Kirkland, Director of Public Affairs Southern California Rental Housing Association 5675 Ruffin Road, Suite 310 | San Diego, CA 92123 Office: 858.278.8070 | Direct: Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 6.2 - Kirkland - Received 10/25/22 mailto:mkirkland@so calrha.org mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:jmccann@chula vistaca.govmailto:jmgalvez@chula vistaca.gov mailto:spadilla@chula vistaca.govmailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:GGoogins@chula vistaca.gov mailto:CityManager@chula vistaca.govmailto:HAC@chula vistaca.gov mailto:SKurz@chula vistaca.govmailto:rich@ psar.org mailto:george @psar.org mailto:mkirkland@sd caa.com www.sdcaa.co m 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 114 of 810 October 19, 2022 The Honorable Mary Casillas Salas and Councilmembers 276 Fourth Ave Chula Vista, CA 91910 Sent Via Electronic Transmission Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: On behalf of the Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS®(PSAR) and the Southern California Rental Housing Association (SCRHA), we are writing to respectfully request that the hearing to consider the Residential Landlord & Tenant Protection Ordinance be delayed until there is time for the City’s Housing Advisory Commission and all Stakeholders to thoroughly study and provide input on the new version of the ordinance. Our organizations sincerely appreciate the efforts of city staff over the course of the last year. The communication and stakeholder outreach has been a process that other jurisdictions should emulate. However, due to circumstances beyond city staff’s control, the second hearing on the ordinance has been rescheduled at least five times since July. Additionally, numerous new drafts have been provided to stakeholders, the most recent iterations without track changes to make changes easily identifiable. As trade organizations with thousands of members, we do our very best to keep members informed and let them know how they may participate in the public process. Our organizations have shared information in anticipation of hearings only to have to notify them of cancellations. It has become tantamount to “crying wolf” in their eyes and some housing providers fear this is being done purposely to dilute their grassroots participation. While our organizations don’t necessarily agree with those sentiments, the process thus far has left all stakeholders and their constituencies disenfranchised. The Council had great wisdom in establishing a Housing Advisory Commission. Considering the drastic changes made to the proposed ordinance since the last time it was presented to the Housing Advisory Commission, it is critical that the Commission’s value be leveraged. Why wouldn’t the council have its own experts review the ordinance? Again, we understand that there have been some circumstances beyond city staff’s control that have necessitated the hearing schedule changes. The tragic loss of a key city staff person has certainly left a void. However, prior to that, stakeholders were informed that at least one delay was in an effort to make sure that all councilmembers could be in attendance at the hearing. On June 28 stakeholders were notified that the hearing scheduled for July 12 was moved to July Written Communications Item 6.2 - Kirkland - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 115 of 810 26 because staff had been informed that not all Councilmembers would be in attendance at the July 12 meeting and had therefore been asked to wait until the next meeting to present the revised Residential Landlord & Tenant Ordinance. Given that one councilmember must recuse themselves from voting, this approach seems to indicate that the proposed ordinance will only come forward when there are enough councilmembers present who may support the ordinance. This special treatment of this particular ordinance has only served to reinforce the concerns of some in the community as it relates to transparency and a fair public process overall. It has become clear that all councilmembers do not see the proposed ordinance as an emergency as some have suggested. Therefore, our organizations respectfully request that the ordinance be shelved so as not to require staff to devote valuable time and energy to creating new regulation and instead allow them to focus on education and outreach. Our organizations remain committed to educating the entire community of rights and responsibilities. Furthermore, a new Mayor, new Councilmembers, and a new City Attorney will be in place in the coming months. An ordinance like this could create permanent regulations and should be considered by those who will be in office during the time in which the law may take effect, especially considering the responsibilities that the ordinance would place on the City Attorney . Inviting input from the Housing Advisory Commission and allowing the next round of elected leaders to continue the deliberation you have started would reassure concerned constituents that this is a public process. If you have any questions, please contact George Ching, PSAR Government Affairs Director at 619-421-7811 or Molly Kirkland, SCRHA Director of Public Affairs at 858-278-8070. Sincerely, Rich D’Ascoli Alan Pentico Executive Director Executive Director CC: Glen Googins, City Attorney Maria V. Kachadoorian, City Manager Housing Advisory Commissioners Stacey Kurz, Housing Manager Written Communications Item 6.2 - Kirkland - Received 10/25/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 116 of 810 From: Ariadne Garcia Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 5:32 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: For tonight's comment Good evening, This is my e comment for item 6.2 Tenant Protections. Me and my husband have suffered and have been victims of harassment, discrimination, and unlawful eviction. This has been going on since April of 2022 until present. We are residents of Chula Vista and have been all our lives. We are on F street. It has affected my health disability. They never fixed the mold in the carpet, we have a roach, and infestation. I have been bitten by bugs and have had flares due to my condition. The landlord and apartment manager were notified and they didn't care. Instead they wanted to evict us, and for us to be homeless. The apartment manager has laughed at me, smirked at us, and even brought her friends over to try and scare us and to try and make our living situation horrible. Me and my husband have remained strong but the health hazards in this unit and in the whole building is unsafe for the whole community. Please I ask you to highly consider passing this extremely important ordinance to stop these illegal evictions, harassment ,and denial of fixing apartments due to unsafe health conditions. I have had visits to my doctor and urgent care so many times due to this situation. I am a remote college student and the manager purposefully disturbs me while I am in my home. Her boyfriend has peeked to see what my husband is doing like delivering food to our friendly neighbors or even throwing the trash. They also denied a refrigerator to the wonderful senior neighbors. And we have proof that they had new refrigerators and appliances in their garage room. They just love to us tenants. Its been two years they don't call pest control. We have had lizards, mice, roaches, mosquitoes and now ants. Please do something about this. The neighbors have their own locks and sticks by the windows because the homeless have entered by force the building. They even took a shower in our laundry room. When my husband informed the manager, she never closed the laundry room or did anything to fox it. Please pass this law to protect us tenants and advise us of how to report these people!. Thank You Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Warning: External Email Written Communication Item 6.2 - Garcia - Received 10/26/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 117 of 810 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 November 1, 2022 ITEM TITLE Grant Award, Appropriation, and Purchase: Accept and Appropriate Grant Funds From Cal OES for a High- Frequency Communications Equipment Program and Authorize the Purchase of Radio Equipment Report Number: 22-0277 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Fire Environmental Notice: The Project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15303 class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). Recommended Action Adopt a resolution accepting $55,764 in grant funds from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), appropriating the funds to the supplies and services category of the Fire Grants Section of the State Grants Fund for a high-frequency communications equipment program, and authorizing the purchase of radio equipment. (4/5 Vote Required) SUMMARY The purpose of the High Frequency Communications Equipment (FH) Program is to provide funding to Alerting Authorities for equipment that will allow local governments to be included in an integrated high frequency radio network service that utilizes frequencies authorized by the Federal Communications Commission and intended to be capable of communications with state, local, and federal agencies. Funds shall be used for the procurement of high frequency communication equipment needed to interface and communicate with the high frequency communication system which may include:  High frequency radio, antenna, cabling, power source, radio combiners, radio interface for existing radio consoles;  Installation costs for high frequency communications equipment;  Site visits, shipping, and any applicable taxes; and  Training on the use the high frequency equipment 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 118 of 810 P a g e | 2 Cal OES has selected award recipients to purchase communications equipment that will be a reliable redundancy during emergencies. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15303 class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) because the proposed actions would not result in a significant effect on the environment. Thus, no further environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable DISCUSSION Emergency preparedness is a pillar of public safety and the City of Chula Vista is dedicated to providing the highest levels of public safety to its communities. The State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) has presented the City with a grant funding opportunity to invest in alternative emergency communications equipment to enhance preparedness and response capabilities. Reliable communications are integral to the effectiveness and success of emergency response operations. Ensuring that the City of Chula Vista has reliable primary, secondary, and tertiary communications methods is a precursory first step in preparing the City for emergency response. High frequency radio equipment operates on a different radio communications infrastructure than the standard 800 MHz or VHF radios. While phones and 800 MHz radios are the primary forms of communication, high frequency radios are a reliable redundancy. National security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) personnel need to transmit critical messages to coordinate emergency operations even when traditional means of communicating via landlines and cellphones are damaged or destroyed. The SHAred RESources (SHARES) High Frequency (HF) Radio Program, administered by the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) National Coordinating Center for Communications (NCC), provides an additional means for users with a NS/EP mission to communicate when landline and cellular communications are unavailable. SHARES members use existing HF radio resources to coordinate and transmit emergency messages. SHARES users rely on HF radio communications to perform critical functions, including those areas rel ated to leadership, safety, maintenance of law and order, finance, and public health. This program also provides the emergency response community with a single interagency emergency message handling and frequency sharing system. SHARES promotes interoperability between HF radio systems and promotes awareness of applicable regulatory, procedural, and technical issues. More than 3,290 HF radio stations—representing over 590 federal, state, and industry organizations located in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and several locations overseas—are resource contributors to the SHARES HF Radio Program. Nearly 500 emergency planning and response personnel participate in SHARES. Approximately 200 HF radio channels are available for use by SHARES members. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 119 of 810 P a g e | 3 The purpose of the High Frequency Communications Equipment (FH) Program is to provide funding to Alerting Authorities for equipment that will allow local governments to be included in an integrated high frequency radio network service that utilizes frequencies authorized by the Federal Communications Commission and intended to be capable of communications with state, local, and federal agencies. The City of Chula Vista is coordinating with Cal OES for the purchase of high frequency radio equipment that is a complete “turn key” station to operate on the SHARES HF Radio Program and the Cal OES STACOM (State Communications System) HF (2-8MHz) which is designed to provide point-to- point emergency radio communications coverage across the state of California. This system implements the FCC "State Emergency Capability Using Radio Effectively" (“Operation SECURE”) capability and is licensed and operated in accordance with FCC Rules Part 90 - Private Land Mobile Services and in accordance with FCC Public Notice 2419 to the State of California. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualif ying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any Chula Vista City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Approval of this resolution will result in a one-time appropriation of $55,764 to the Supplies & Services category of the Fire Grants Section of the State Grants Fund. The funding from Cal OES will completely offset these costs, therefore, there is no net fiscal impact to the City. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact for accepting these grant funds. ATTACHMENTS 1. Cal OES Notification of Grant Subaward Application Approval Staff Contact: Marlon King, Emergency Services Manager 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 120 of 810 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE CAL OES GRANT SUBAWARD FOR THE HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT PROGRAM AUTHORIZING STAFF TO COMPLETE THE PURCHASE OF RADIO EQUIPMENT AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS THEREFOR WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 2.14 Emergency Organization Department empowers the City to prepare and carry out plans for the protection of persons and property within this city in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of this City with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private persons; and WHEREAS, the Emergency Services Manager within the Chula Vista Fire Department is charged with preparing the plans and resources necessary to ensure a coordinated emergency response; and WHEREAS, on February 11, 2022, Cal OES released a grant funding opportunity for local jurisdictions to purchase high frequency radio systems, and on May 31, 2022, the City of Chula Vista was selected as a grant recipient and awarded $55,764 to purchase eligible radio equipment; and WHEREAS, providing reliable and redundant communications capabilities is integral to the effectiveness and success of emergency response operations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it accepts and appropriates the Cal OES Grant Subaward for High Frequency Communications Equipment Program in the amount of $55,764 to the Supplies & Services category of the Fire Grants Section of the State Grants Fund. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that is authorizes the Emergency Services Manager to complete the purchase of necessary radio equipment using the allocated grant funds. Presented by Approved as to form by Harry Muns Glen R. Googins Fire Department City Attorney 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 121 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 122 of 810 Notification of Grant Subaward Application Approval High Frequency Communications Equipment Program Grant Subaward #: FH21 01 6364 Dear Marlon King: Marlon King, Emergency Services Manager Chula Vista, City of 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910-2631 Subject: May 31, 2022 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE l MATHER, CALIFORNIA 95655 www.CalOES.ca.gov GAVIN NEWSOM GOVERNOR MARK S. GHILARDUCCI DIRECTOR Congratulations! The California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) has approved your Grant Subaward application in the amount of $55,764, subject to Budget approval. A copy of your approved Grant Subaward is enclosed for your records. Cal OES will make every effort to process payment requests within 45 days of receipt of your Report of Expenditures & Request for Funds (Cal OES Form 2-201). This Grant Subaward is subject to the Cal OES Subrecipient Handbook. You are encouraged to read and familiarize yourself with the Cal OES Subrecipient Handbook, which can be viewed on the Cal OES website at www.caloes.ca.gov. Any funds received in excess of current needs, approved amounts, or those funds owed as a result of a close-out or audit, must be refunded to Cal OES within 30 days upon receipt of an invoice. Please contact your Program Specialist, Nicolas Martin, at (916) 539-3501 with questions about this notice. VS Grants Processing Unit cc: Subrecipient's file Program Specialist 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 123 of 810  mail log: 753496 By Al Hardoy at 2:02 pm, Apr 07, 2022 ENY: 2021-22 Chapter: 21 SL: 01765Item: 0690-001-0001 Pgm: 0395Fund: General FundProgram: High Frequency Communications Equipment ProgramMatch Req.: NoneProject ID: OES21PSC1000000 Amount: $55,764.00 SC: 2021-01765 DocuSign Envelope ID: 8254B62A-A229-49A8-9A16-482E2432F1D0 5/23/20225/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 124 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 125 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 126 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 127 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 128 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 129 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 130 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 131 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 132 of 810 VSPS Budget Summary Report05/31/22 F/S/L (Funding Types): F=Federal, S=State, L=Local Match Paid/Expended=posted in ledger w/Claim Schedule, Pending=Processed, but not yet in Claim ScheduleTotal Local Match: 0F/S/LF/S/LF/S/LFunding SourceFunding SourceFunding Source 0Budget AmountBudget AmountBudget AmountPaid/ExpendedPaid/ExpendedPaid/ExpendedA. Personal Services - Salaries/Employee BenefitsB. Operating ExpensesC. EquipmentBalanceBalanceBalance 021PSC121PSC121PSC1SSS 0 0 0 0 0 55,764 0 0 55,764High Frequency Communications Equipment ProgramChula Vista, City ofFH21 High Frequency Communications Equipment ProgramTotal Funded:Total Project Cost: 0 55,764 55,764 0 55,764 55,764Budget AmountPaid/ExpendedBalance 0 0 0 0 0 55,764 0 0 55,764Total A. Personal Services - Salaries/Employee Benefits:Total B. Operating Expenses:Total C. Equipment:PendingPendingPendingPending BalancePending BalancePending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 55,764 0 0 0 0 0 55,764 0 0 0 55,764 0 55,764PendingPending BalancePerformance Period: 04/01/22 - 10/31/23blank fillerblank fillerblank fillerSubaward #: FH21 01 6364Latest Request: , Not Final 2012022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 133 of 810 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 November 1, 2022 ITEM TITLE Grant Award and Appropriation: Accept Grant Funds from UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine for Shelter Services Report Number: 22-0296 Location: 130 Beyer Way Department: Animal Care Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution accepting $53,000 from UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine on behalf of its Shelter Medicine Program and appropriating funds to the Supplies & Services and Other expense categories in the Other Grant Funds for that purpose. (4/5 Vote Required) SUMMARY The Animal Care Facility has received a grant award in the amount of $53,000 to use for shelter services, related to clinics and community outreach at the Chula Vista Animal Care Facility. This grant award needs to be appropriated in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Budget. Staff requests that $53,000 be appropriated to the Supplies & Services and Other expense categories in the Other Grant Funds for the Animal Care Facility department budget; this appropriation is fully offset by grant revenues. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 134 of 810 P a g e | 2 Not Applicable DISCUSSION The Chula Vista Animal Care Facility received a grant in the amount of $53,000 from UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine on behalf of its Shelter Medicine Program. These funds will be used to provide 4 outreach clinics; medical staff support, vouchers for qualifying individuals, ma rketing costs and return to home assistance. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the 500-foot rule found in California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 18702.2(a)(11), is not applicable to this decision for purposes of determining a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Approval of the resolution will result in the Grant Funds appropriation of $53,000 in both revenues and expenditures in the Other Grants Fund, resulting in no fiscal impact to the General Fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact. ATTACHMENTS None Staff Contact: John P. Skeel, Director of Animal Services 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 135 of 810 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS FROM UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE FOR SHELTER SERVICES AND APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Animal Care Facility applied for and was awarded grants through UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine in the amount of $53,000; and WHEREAS, City staff intends to use the grant funds to offer outreach clinics, provide medical staff support, vouchers to qualified individuals, marketing costs, and return to home assistance in the City of Chula Vista and at the Chula Vista Animal Care Facility for residents of Chula Vista, Lemon Grove, and National City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that it: 1. Accepts grant funds from UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine in the amount of $53,000. 2. Approves an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Other Grants Fund Budget and appropriates the $53,000 in grant funds to the Supplies & Services and Other expense categories. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Skeel Glen R. Googins Director City Attorney 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 136 of 810 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 November 1, 2022 ITEM TITLE Financial Report and Appropriation: Accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the Quarter Ending June 30, 2022, and Appropriate Funds for that Purpose Report Number: 22-0275 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Finance Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Accept the quarterly financial report for the quarter ended June 30, 2022 and adopt a resolution making various amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021/22 budget to adjust for variances and appropriating funds for that purpose. (4/5 Vote Required) SUMMARY The Finance Department, in collaboration with other City departments, prepares quarterly financial reports for the General Fund that reflect budget to actual comparisons, projected revenues and expenditures, and highlight major variances that may require additional action or changes. This report is as of June 30, 2022, and is in compliance with Section 504 (f) of the City Charter, which requires that quarterly financial reports be filed by the Director of Finance through the City Manager. In preparing the quarterly financial projections, staff has identified various budget cha nges that are needed to accurately reflect actual revenues and expenditures or address changes in budgetary needs. For government entities, a budget creates a legal framework for spending during the fiscal year. After the budget is approved by the City Council, there are circumstances which arise that could require adjustments to the approved budget. Council Policy 220-02 “Financial Reporting and Transfer Authority” was established in January of 1996 and allows for budget transfers and adjustments to be completed. This report discusses budget adjustments that staff recommends in the General Fund as well as various other funds to address identified fiscal issues. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 137 of 810 P a g e | 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the proposed activity consists of a governmental fiscal/administrative activity which does not result in a physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable DISCUSSION As part of the fiscal year 2021-2022 year-end process, staff has reviewed budget to actual reports to identify potential budget overages at either the category or fund level. Various budget changes are needed to align the budget with anticipated year-end actuals. For government entities, a budget creates a legal framework for spending during the fiscal year. After the budget is approved, circumstances arise that may require adjustments to the approved budget. City Council Policy No. 220-02 “Financial Reporting and Transfer Authority” permits budget transfers to be completed. Transfers that exceed $15,000 require City Council approval. The City Council may amend the budget at any meeting after the adoption of the budget with a 4/5ths vote. Staff is seeking approval for recommended adjustments in the General Fund and various other funds to align the budget with anticipated year-end actual expenditures where the actuals are expected to exceed the budget. A report on the full results of fiscal year 2021-2022, including audited actual revenues and expenditures, will be provided following the completion of the annual audit and with the presentation of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. This report will provide summary information for the following areas:  General Fund Revenues and Expenditures  Adjustments to General Fund Expenditures  Adjustments to non-General Fund funds General Fund Overview The General Fund began the year with an unassigned (available) fund balance of $28.3 million. This balance was the combination of the Operating Reserve of $25.9 million and $2.4 million set aside for a contribution to the Pension Reserve Fund, per the City’s General Fund Reserves – Fiscal Health Policy. The $2.4 million contribution was made during Fiscal Year 2021/22. The Operating Reserve is anticipated to increase by $1.4M as of June 30, 2022. This increase will maintain the reserve at the target level of 15% of next fiscal year’s (fiscal year 2022/23) budgeted operating expenditures. Additionally, the Economic Contingency Reserve is expected to be fully funded at the 5.0% target and the Catastrophic Event Reserve is anticipated to be partially funded at 1.5% with a target of 3.0% of budgeted operating expenditures. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 138 of 810 P a g e | 3 General Fund Revenues The City’s General Fund revenues are projected to be $18.6 million more than the Revised Budget amounts, largely as a result of increased projections for Sales Tax, Measure A, and Measure P revenues, and Transient Occupancy Taxes. Sales Tax related revenues rebounded from the decline experienced at the beginning of the pandemic, moved into a period of sustained consumer spending, and also increased due to the impact of inflation on taxable goods, most notably general consumer goods and higher gasoline prices. It is anticipated to decrease in future fiscal years because of global economic conditions including increased inflation, reduced, or eliminated federal funding that was distributed during the pandemic (i.e., federal stimulus payments to families, enhanced unemployment benefits, etc.), and the Federal reserve increasing interest rates. Table 1 in millions Adopted Budget Amended Budget Year-end Projection Variance Revenue Source Major Discretionary Revenues Property Tax 40.7$ 42.5$ 44.2$ 1.6$ Property Tax in lieu of VLF 24.8 25.9 25.9 - Sales Tax 39.7 39.7 46.1 6.4 Measure P Sales Tax 23.0 23.0 27.6 4.6 Measure A Sales Tax 23.0 23.0 27.6 4.6 Franchise Fees 12.9 12.9 13.9 1.0 Transient Occupancy Tax 4.9 4.9 7.4 2.5 Utility User Tax 3.8 3.8 3.7 (0.1) Major Discretionary Revenues Subtotal 172.9 175.8 196.4 20.5 Other General Fund Revenues American Rescue Plan Act - 4.6 1.5 (3.2) Other Revenues 45.1 49.1 50.3 1.2 Other General Fund Revenues Subtotal 45.1 53.7 51.8 (1.9) Other General Fund Sources - 6.2 6.2 - Total Revenues/Sources 218.1$ 235.8$ 254.4$ 18.6$ Expenditures Personnel Services 121.5$ 120.5$ 118.8 1.7$ Supplies and Services 15.4 17.6 18.3 (0.7) Other Expenses 1.6 10.8 18.9 (8.1) Utilities 4.9 4.9 6.3 (1.4) Other Expenditures 74.6 82.1 89.9 (7.8) Total Expenditures 218.1$ 235.8$ 252.2$ (16.4)$ Total General Fund Surplus/(Deficit)-$ -$ 2.2$ 2.2$ Fiscal Year 2021/22 General Fund Overview 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 139 of 810 P a g e | 4 Transient Occupancy Tax revenues are projected to exceed budget by $2.5 million. This is due to higher occupancy rates and increase in travel and vacation activity that is tied to the removal of the Governor’s Stay at Home order issued at the height of the pandemic. American Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds are below budget due to a reduced use of ARPA funds than anticipated. These funds will be repurposed and brought forward to Council with a revision to the ARPA spending plan. The revised plan will be presented with a future Quarterly Financial Report. General Fund Expenditures The City’s General Fund expenditures are estimated to exceed budget by $16.4 million, this is largely due to increased Measure P and Measure A Sales Tax revenues. An increase in the Sales Tax revenues for both of these measures results in an increase in expenditures (transfers out). Both Measure P and Measure A are expected to exceed budget by $4.6 million each for a total increase of $9.2 million. The Other Expenses category is anticipated to exceed budget by $7.2 milli on this is mainly due to two transactions. The first is the loan agreement that the City entered with the State of California for $3.4 million (Resolution 2022-070), this resolution increased the appropriations in the Housing Authority fund, but it is more appropriately placed within the General Fund. These funds were received as a stopgap for the Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP). It is expected that this loan will be repaid with future Federal Funding. The appropriation for this program is being carried forward into fiscal year 2022/23. The second is resulting from the bond issuance for the Bayfront project. The Chula Vista Bayfront Facilities Financing Authority issued bonds of $325 million on May 26, 2022. In order to recognize the City’s revenue contribution towards this project a prior period adjustment is being recorded in the General Fund, resulting in a city contribution expense of $3.7 million. This is purely an accounting transaction, necessary to accurately reflect the City’s total contribution towards the Bayfront project as a part of the bond issuance. Additionally, there were $0.9 million in contributions to the Bayfront budgeted as transfers that will be reclassified to contribution expenditures to the Bayfront. The Personnel category is anticipated to end the fiscal year with savings of $1.7 million, this is largely due to vacancies throughout the City, with most vacancies occurring within the Police department. As a result of the vacancies, increased overtime expenditures have been incurred primarily in the public safety departments but are offset by salary savings and decrease in fringe costs. The Utilities category is anticipated to exceed budget by $1.4 million, this is largely due to increased energy costs and delayed savings from the solar and battery projects at various City sites. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 140 of 810 P a g e | 5 Departmental Revenues and Expenditures The largest variances in Departmental Revenues are projected to be in Non-Departmental, Development Services and Engineering/Capital Project. The Non-Departmental positive variance of $17.6 million is where the major revenues are recorded including Sales Tax, Measure A, Measure P, and Motor Vehicle License Fees. Development Services is where the ERAP loan proceeds from the State of California are recorded as previously mentioned. The largest negative variance of $1.5 million is in the Engineering/Capital Projects department that reflects a decrease in interfund reimbursements that is due to a large number of personnel vacancies. Table 2 Department Amended Budget Year-end Projection Variance City Council $ 6,000 $ 20,000 333.3% Boards & Commissions - - 0.0% City Clerk 14,000 53,725 383.8% City Attorney 805,177 460,322 57.2% Administration 145,000 99,111 68.4% Information Technology 280,561 206,361 73.6% Human Resources 526,430 652,805 124.0% Finance 1,897,648 1,741,447 91.8% Non-Departmental 188,582,125 206,136,456 109.3% Animal Care Facility 1,208,437 1,121,047 92.8% Economic Development 990,432 763,074 77.0% Development Services 2,186,068 5,782,649 264.5% Engineering/Capital Project 9,456,866 7,983,324 84.4% Police 6,266,367 5,818,922 92.9% Fire 5,171,594 5,187,456 100.3% Public Works 7,790,398 7,392,334 94.9% Parks and Recreation 2,953,405 3,591,133 121.6% Library 1,288,916 1,147,880 89.1% Total Departmental Revenue $ 229,569,424 $ 248,158,047 108.1% Fiscal Year 2021/22 General Fund Departmental Revenues 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 141 of 810 P a g e | 6 The Departmental Expenditure variances that exceed budget are expected to be in various departments. The 13.4% variance in the City Clerk department is due to increased election costs. The 3.8% increase in the Human Resources department is due to increased recruitment cost due to a larger than normal number of recruitments over the past fiscal year. The increase in non-Departmental is due the increase in transfers out for both Measure P and A as well as the contribution to the Bayfront described earlier in this report. The increase in Development Services is related to the carry forward of appropriations for the ERAP loan from the State of California and is offset with the loan proceeds. Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Budget Adjustments Staff is recommending various adjustments, appropriations, and transfers to City Departmental and Fund budgets that require City Council authorization. General Fund Adjustments In the General Fund, some of the transfers are between expense categories within the same Department and some transfers are between Departments. There are also proposed budget adjustments reflecting increased revenue where needed to address unanticipated expenditure category overages and ensure accurate year- end reporting. The recommended budget adjustments are shown in the table below. The overall net cost to the General Fund is an increase of $3.2 million as a result of the proposed budget adjustments. Table 3 Department Amended Budget Year-end Projection % Expended City Council 1,693,398 1,388,345 82.0% Boards & Commissions 162,485 153,942 0.0% City Clerk 1,258,063 1,426,231 113.4% City Attorney 3,139,081 2,712,596 86.4% Administration 2,407,215 2,358,214 98.0% Information Technology 3,747,738 3,596,047 96.0% Human Resources 2,903,359 3,013,632 103.8% Finance 3,925,784 3,674,900 93.6% Non-Departmental 91,645,766 106,432,299 116.1% Animal Care Facility 2,839,084 2,743,845 96.6% Economic Development 2,183,345 1,506,836 69.0% Development Services 2,618,546 5,859,598 223.8% Engineering/Capital Project 9,222,899 9,492,681 102.9% Police 48,853,790 48,524,747 99.3% Fire 32,193,488 32,401,321 100.6% Public Works 11,751,593 11,846,377 100.8% Parks and Recreation 11,791,371 11,948,365 101.3% Library 3,446,802 3,090,012 89.6% Total Expenditure Budget $ 235,783,807 $ 252,169,988 106.9% Fiscal Year 2021/22 General Fund Departmental Expenditures 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 142 of 810 P a g e | 7 While the net cost to the General Fund from the proposed budget adjustments is a decrease of $3,200,634, there are several key items to note. 1. Various City Departments – Transfer budget of Personnel, Supplies and Services, Other Capital, and Utilities to address budget shortfalls and overages. 2. Non-Departmental - Increase both Transfers-Out expense and revenue appropriations by $4,625,105 for FY2022 Measure P actuals that exceeded budget. 3. Non-Departmental - Increase both Transfers-Out expense and revenue appropriations by $4,590,294 for FY2022 Measure A actuals that exceeded budget. 4. Non-Departmental - Increase Other Expense appropriations by $3,683,951 for Chula Vista Bayfront commitment. 5. Development Services – Increase expenditure and revenue appropriations by $3,426,935 as a correction for loan proceeds related to the ERAP Program. Other Fund Adjustments The following recommended adjustments are for funds outside of the General Fund. The proposed adjustments, displayed in the table, have a net cost decrease of approximately $8.8 million to the various identified funds. The proposed adjustments are to impact the fund balances or current year available revenues of the respective noted funds. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 143 of 810 P a g e | 8 The Other Funds proposed budget adjustments resulting in a net decrease of $8,772,088 primarily being derived by the following transactions: 1. 2016 Measure P Sales Tax - Increase Transfer-In revenues from the General Fund by $4,625,105 for actuals that exceeded budget. 2. 2018 Measure A Sales Tax - Increase Transfer-In revenues by $4,590,294 for actuals that exceeded budget. 3. Public Liability Trust Fund – Increase expense appropriations by $702,825 for higher than budgeted legal costs, and revenue appropriations by $79,806 with difference funded by fund balance. 4. Transport Enterprise Fund - Increase expense appropriations by $1,262,108 for capital purchases of vehicles & equipment, and revenue appropriations by $652,353. Table 5 PERSONNEL SUPPLIES &OTHER OTHER CIP TRANSFERS TOTAL TOTAL Footnote SERVICES SERVICES EXPENSES CAPITAL BUDGET OUT UTILITIES EXPENSE REVENUE NET COST OTHER FUNDS Bayfront Lease Revenue 1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ (294,107)$ (294,107)$ 2016 Measure P Sales Tax 2 - - - - - - - - (4,625,105) (4,625,105) 2018 Measure A Sales Tax 3 - - - - - - - - (4,590,294) (4,590,294) Utility Tax Settlement 4 - - 22 - - - - 22 (22) - OR V2 Pub Benefit Contribution 5 - - 82 - - - - 82 (82) - Parking Meter 6 - - - - - - 5,649 5,649 (5,649) - Developer Contributions 7 - - 93,025 - - - - 93,025 (93,025) - Donations 8 - - 160,934 - - - - 160,934 (160,934) - Permanent Endowments 8 - (160,934) - - - - - (160,934) 160,934 - Federal Grants 9 - - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 - 50,000 State Grants 10 - - - - 9,002,506 (9,002,506) - - - - Chula Vista Housing Authority 24 - - (3,426,935) - - - - (3,426,935) 3,426,935 - RDA Successor Agency Fund 12 - - 46,522 - - - - 46,522 - 46,522 Section 115 Trust 13 - 36,278 - - - - - 36,278 - 36,278 Public Liability Trust 14 - 291,949 410,876 - - - - 702,825 (79,806) 623,019 Bayfront Special Tax District 15 - - 569,589 - - - - 569,589 (408,624) 160,965 Central Garage Fund 16 - 208,955 - - - - - 208,955 (56,393) 152,562 Equipment Vehicle Replacement 17 - - 240 - - - - 240 (240) - Vehicle Replacement Fund 18 - - 63,051 - - - - 63,051 (63,051) - Bayfront Trolley Station 19 - - 19 - - - - 19 (19) - CV Elite Athlete Training Ctr 20 - - 298,436 - - - - 298,436 (298,436) - Transport Enterprise 21 - 652,353 - 609,755 - - - 1,262,108 (652,353) 609,755 Long Term Debt - City of CV 22 10,833,455 - - - - - - 10,833,455 (10,833,455) - 2017 CREBs LRBs 23 - 4,968 - - - - - 4,968 (4,968) - Capital Improvement Projects 10, 11 - - - - (9,002,506) - - (9,002,506) 8,060,823 (941,683) Total Other Funds 10,833,455$ 1,033,569$ (1,784,139)$ 609,755$ 50,000$ (9,002,506)$ 5,649$ 1,745,783$ (10,517,871)$ (8,772,088)$ Other Fund Amendment Footnotes Fiscal Year 2021/2022 - 4th Quarter Other Funds Budget Adjustments Summary 11 - Increase revenue appropriations by $941,683 for the Veterans Wall insurance payment in the Capital Improvement Fund. 5 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $5,649 for utilities in the Parking Meter Fund. 1 - Increase revenue budget by $294,107 in the Bayfront Lease Revenue Fund from the General Fund. 2 - Increase revenue budget by $4,625,105 for Measure P Sales Tax revenues from the General Fund. 4 - Increase both revenue and expenditures appropriations by $22 for Other Expenses category for bank charges. 10 - Transfer $9,002,065 revenue and expenditure appropriations from the Capital Improvement Projects Fund to the State Grants Fund for CIP related to Eucalyptus Park approved by the City Council on Resolution No. 2022-100. 6 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $123,000 for Personnel Services for Wellness Incentives. 8 - Transfer $160,934 revenue and expenditure appropriations from the Permanent Endowments Fund to the Donations Funds. 3 - Increase revenue budget by $4,590,294 for Measure A Sales Tax revenues from the General Fund. 9 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $50,000 for CIP STL0436 (D Street Sidewalk Project). 7 - Increase both revenue and expenditures appropriations by $93,025 for a Developer Contribution from HomeFed Developer Agreement approved by the City Council on July 13, 2021. 12 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $46,522 for Other Expenditures in the RDA Successor Agency Fund. 13 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $36,278 for Supplies and Services for contract services in the Section 115 Fund. 14 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $702,825 for higher than budgeted legal costs, and increase revenue budget by $79,806 in the Public Liability Trust Fund. 15 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $569,589 Other Expenses, and increase revenue budget by $408,624 in the Bayfront Special District Tax Fund. 16 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $208,955 for Supplies and Services, and increase revenue budget by $56,393 in the Central Garage Fund. 17 - Increase both revenue and expenditures appropriations by $240 for Other Expenses category for bank charges. 18 - Increase both revenue and expenditures by $63,051 in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. 19 - Increase both revenue and expenditures appropriations by $19 for Other Expenses category for bank charges. 20 - Increase both revenue and expenditures appropriations by $298,436 for the CV Elite Athlete Training Center. 21 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $1,262,108 for equipment and other purchases, and increase revenue budget by $652,353 in the Transport Fund. 22 - Increase expenditure appropriations by $10,833,455 due to an accounting correction for Unfunded Liability costs related to the issuance of the Pension Obligation Bonds in the Long Term Debt 23 - Increase both revenue and expenditures appropriations by $4,968 for Supplies and Services. 24 - Transfer expenditure and revenue appropriations by $3,426,935 for loan proceeds from the Housing Authority Fund to the General Fund that was previously approved by the City Council on Resolution 2022-070. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 144 of 810 P a g e | 9 5. Capital Improvement Projects Fund – Increase revenue appropriations by $941,683 for the Veterans Wall insurance payment, and transfer expenditure and revenues appropriations by $9,002,506 for Eucalyptus Park (PRK0340) to the State Grants Fund. Pension Obligation Bond February of 2021 the City issued Pension Obligation Bonds (POBs) in the amount of $350 million. These bonds allowed the City to pay off the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) with CalPERS. The City also began to set aside 75% of the saving generated by the difference between the estimated UAL payment and the bond payment into a Section 115 Trust Fund. These monies are available to pay for any future UAL that may arise and to call a portion of the POB in 2031. The savings from the 2020/21 fiscal year allowed us to make an additional $2.4 million contribution this fiscal year. The City’s pensi on actuary consultant Govinvest prepared an analysis for the City that reflects the funding status of the City’s CalPERS plans before the POB and after the POB. For the year ended June 30,2021, the City’s plans are 109.3% funded after the issuance of the POB. Prior to the POB the plan would have been funded at 78.0%. Based on the latest numbers from CalPERS it is anticipated for the year ended June 30, 2022, the City’s plans will be 98.1% funded, this again is a significant improvement from the pre-issuance estimate of 69.3% funded had the POBs not been issued. Table 6 Fiscal Year Accrued Liability Market Value of Assets Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL)Funded Status 2021 $1,248,554,182 $974,061,115 $274,493,067 78.0% 2022 Est.$1,296,540,000 $898,933,440 $397,606,560 69.3% Pre - Pension Obligation Bond 64.0% 66.0% 68.0% 70.0% 72.0% 74.0% 76.0% 78.0% 80.0% $0 $200,000,000 $400,000,000 $600,000,000 $800,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,400,000,000 2021 2022 Est. Pre-POB Funded Status Accrued Liability Market Value of Assets Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL)Funded Status 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 145 of 810 P a g e | 10 DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT The Fourth Quarter Monitoring Report presents projected revenue and expenditure actuals as of October 14, 2022. Approval of the resolution amending the fiscal year 2021-2022 budget will result in the following impacts: General Fund – The proposed adjustments have a net cost increase of $3,200,634 that includes an increase of expenses by approximately $18,025,919 and an increase of revenues by $14,825,285. Table 7 Fiscal Year Accrued Liability Market Value of Assets Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL)Funded Status 2021 $1,248,554,182 $1,364,541,019 -$115,986,837 109.3% 2022 Est.$1,296,540,000 $1,271,980,000 $24,560,000 98.1% Post- Pension Obligation Bond 92.0% 94.0% 96.0% 98.0% 100.0% 102.0% 104.0% 106.0% 108.0% 110.0% 112.0% -$200,000,000 $0 $200,000,000 $400,000,000 $600,000,000 $800,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,400,000,000 $1,600,000,000 2021 2022 Est. Post-POB Funded Status Accrued Liability Market Value of Assets Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL)Funded Status 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 146 of 810 P a g e | 11 Other Funds – The proposed adjustments have a net cost decrease of $8,772,088 to various funds that includes a decrease of expenses by approximately $1,745,783 and an increase of revenues by $10,517,871. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Staff will review the impacted budgets to identify potential ongoing impacts and may recommend changes during fiscal year 2022-2023. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – General Fund Budget Transfers Attachment 2 – General Fund Budget Amendments Staff Contact: Sarah Schoen, Director of Finance and Ed Prendell, Budget and Analysis Manager 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 147 of 810 RESOLUTION NO. ________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 BUDGET TO ADJUST FOR VARIANCES AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) WHEREAS, the City Charter states that at any meeting after the adoption of the budget, the City Council may amend or supplement the budget by a motion adopted by the affirmative votes of at least four members; and WHEREAS, staff has completed the budget review for the quarter ending June 30, 2022 and is recommending a number of budget amendments; and WHEREAS, staff is recommending increasing $18,025,919 in expense appropriations to various departments in the General Fund and increasing revenues appropriations by $14,825,285, resulting in a negative net impact of $3,200,634 to the General Fund; and WHEREAS, Bayfront Lease Revenue Fund, 2016 Measure P Sales Tax Fund, 2018 Measure A Sales Tax Fund, and Capital Improvement Projects Fund will be positively impacted as a result of increased revenue appropriations resulting from the recommended changes; and WHEREAS, the Federal Grants Fund, RDA Successor Agency Fund, Section 115 Trust Fund, Public Liability Trust Fund, Bayfront Special Tax District, Central Garage Fund, and Transport Enterprise Fund will be negatively impacted due to adjustments that will add appropriations that will be made from the available balances of these funds; and WHEREAS, the recommended adjustments to the Utility Tax Settlement Fund, OR V2 Pub Benefit Contribution Fund, Parking Meter Fund, Developer Contributions Fund, Donations, Fund, Permanent Endowments Fund, State Grants Fund, Chula Vista Housing Authority Fund, Equipment Vehicle Replacement Fund, Vehicle Replacement Fund, Bayfront Trolley Station Fund, CV Elite Training Center Fund, Long Term Debt – City of CV Fund, and 2017 CREBs LRBs Fund consist of offsetting adjustments between revenue and expenditure categories and are neutral resulting in no net impact to these funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it does hereby amend the fiscal year 2021/22 budget and approves the following appropriations and transfers: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 148 of 810 Resolution No. ________ Page 2 Summary of General Fund Appropriations and/or Transfers Summary of Appropriations and/or Transfers for Other Funds Presented by: Approved as to form by: Sarah Schoen Glen R. Googins Director of Finance City Attorney Other Funds Budget Admendments Summary - 4th Quarter Fiscal Year 2021/2022 PERSONNEL SUPPLIES &OTHER OTHER CIP TRANSFERS TOTAL TOTAL SERVICES SERVICES EXPENSES CAPITAL BUDGET OUT UTILITIES EXPENSE REVENUE NET COST OTHER FUNDS Bayfront Lease Revenue -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ (294,107)$ (294,107)$ 2016 Measure P Sales Tax - - - - - - - - (4,625,105) (4,625,105) 2018 Measure A Sales Tax - - - - - - - - (4,590,294) (4,590,294) Utility Tax Settlement - - 22 - - - - 22 (22) - OR V2 Pub Benefit Contribution - - 82 - - - - 82 (82) - Parking Meter - - - - - - 5,649 5,649 (5,649) - Developer Contributions - - 93,025 - - - - 93,025 (93,025) - Donations - - 160,934 - - - - 160,934 (160,934) - Permanent Endowments - (160,934) - - - - - (160,934) 160,934 - Federal Grants - - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 - 50,000 State Grants - - - - 9,002,506 (9,002,506) - - - - Chula Vista Housing Authority - - (3,426,935) - - - - (3,426,935) 3,426,935 - RDA Successor Agency Fund - - 46,522 - - - - 46,522 - 46,522 Section 115 Trust - 36,278 - - - - - 36,278 - 36,278 Public Liability Trust - 291,949 410,876 - - - - 702,825 (79,806) 623,019 Bayfront Special Tax District - - 569,589 - - - - 569,589 (408,624) 160,965 Central Garage Fund - 208,955 - - - - - 208,955 (56,393) 152,562 Equipment Vehicle Replacement - - 240 - - - - 240 (240) - Vehicle Replacement Fund - - 63,051 - - - - 63,051 (63,051) - Bayfront Trolley Station - - 19 - - - - 19 (19) - CV Elite Athlete Training Ctr - - 298,436 - - - - 298,436 (298,436) - Transport Enterprise - 652,353 - 609,755 - - - 1,262,108 (652,353) 609,755 Long Term Debt - City of CV 10,833,455 - - - - - - 10,833,455 (10,833,455) - 2017 CREBs LRBs - 4,968 - - - - - 4,968 (4,968) - Capital Improvement Projects - - - - (9,002,506) - - (9,002,506) 8,060,823 (941,683) Total Other Funds 10,833,455$ 1,033,569$ (1,784,139)$ 609,755$ 50,000$ (9,002,506)$ 5,649$ 1,745,783$ (10,517,871)$ (8,772,088)$ DEPARTMENT 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 149 of 810 Department From To Reason Amount Public Works Personnel Services Supplies and Services Sign materials 15,000$ Public Works Personnel Services Supplies and Services HVAC Repairs 15,000 Public Works Personnel Services Supplies and Services Radio/Alarm Repairs 15,000 Public Works Personnel Services Supplies and Services Emergency Alarm Repairs 15,000 Public Works Other Capital Supplies and Services Car Wash Repairs 3,000 Total General Fund Budget Transfers 63,000$ Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (as of June 30, 2022) GENERAL FUND BUDGET TRANSFERS Approved by Administration 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 150 of 810 Attachment 2 Resolution Budget Amendments Revenue Expenditure Net Impact 2021-157 Personnel Appropriation -$ 60,280$ (60,280)$ 2021-172 American Rescue Plan Appropriation 4,943,034 4,943,034 - 2021-207 Personnel Appropriation (Measure A)- 542,672 (542,672) 2021-209 Federal Grant Appropriation - 15,917 (15,917) 2021-219 Grant Match Appropriation - 400,000 (400,000) 2021-236 Personnel Appropriation - 79,310 (79,310) 2021-243 IAFF (non-safety)/WCE MOU Appropriation - 50,159 (50,159) 2021-232 First Quarter Budget Adjustments 108,716 640,108 (531,392) 2021-245 Personnel Appropriation 43,096 43,096 - 2022-029 Personnel Appropriation - 315,945 (315,945) 2022-039 MMPR MOU Appropriation - 151,756 (151,756) 2022-054 Personnel Appropriation - 13,524 (13,524) 2022-057 Second Quarter Budget Adjustments 4,748,044 5,641,116 (893,072) 2022-081 Personnel Appropriation 78,000 116,800 (38,800) 2022-088 Vehicle Appropriation (Measure A)- 320,376 (320,376) 2022-105 Third Quarter Budget Adjustments 2,587,350 2,338,830 248,520 2022-107 Bayfront Contribution 1,800,000 1,800,000 - 2022-134 Donation Appropriation (Parks & Recreation)4,250 250 4,000 2022-085 ARPA Allocation Transfer - (200,000) 200,000 Total General Fund Budget Amendments $ 14,312,490 $ 17,273,173 $ (2,960,683) Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (as of June 30, 2022) General Fund Budget Amendments 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 151 of 810 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 November 1, 2022 ITEM TITLE Annexation: Support a Property Owner Application to the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission for Annexation of Otay Ranch Village 13 from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista Report Number: 22-0287 Location: Otay Ranch Village 13 Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution supporting an application submitted by the property owners, Lakeview 1 LLC and Lakeview 2 LLC, c/o Baldwin and Sons and Moller Otay Lakes Investments, LLC, to the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) requesting annexation of the 1,869-acre territory, known as Otay Ranch Village 13, from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista. SUMMARY The property ownership of Otay Ranch Village 13 Lakeview 1 LLC and Lakeview 2 LLC, c/o Baldwin and Sons and Moller Otay Lakes Investments, LLC, submitted an application to LAFCO for their consideration of annexation of the territory from the County of San Diego into the City of Chula Vista. The LAFCO application process requires a City Council resolution as part of the required documents when considering such requests. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with CEQA and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 152 of 810 P a g e | 2 DISCUSSION On September 27, 2022, the property ownership of Otay Ranch Village 13, Lakeview 1 LLC and Lakeview 2 LLC, c/o Baldwin and Sons and Moller Otay Lakes Investments, LLC, submitted an application to LAFCO for their consideration of annexation of the territory from the County of San Diego into the City of Chula Vista. The LAFCO application process requires a City Council resolution as part of the required documents when considering such requests. The territory proposed to be annexed, known as Otay Ranch Village 13 or the Resort Focus Area within the Proctor Valley District of the Unincorporated East Otay Ranch Subarea within the City’s adopted General Plan (Attachment 1), consists of approximately 1,869 acres generally located Northeast of Lower Otay Lake Reservoir with access provided via Otay Lakes Road. This territory is adjacent to the eastern boundaries of the City with future services anticipated to be provided by the City for the development of this territory. Otay Ranch Village 13 is within the City’s adopted General Plan and has a land use designation of Planned Community, approved via Ordinance No. 2578, dated November 9, 1993 (Attachment 2). This land use designation applies as “pre-zoning” of the territory that is a requirement of consideration of annexation into the City. The proposed annexation is consistent with General Plan Policies LUT 68.1 and 68 .2 (Attachment 3). Policy LUT 68.1 states “Ensure that services and infrastructure are adequate to accommodate development in Villages 13, 14 and 15 of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan” and Policy LUT 68.2 states “Evaluate for annexation into the City all development areas within those portions of Villages 13, 14 and 15 that require urban-level services.” The City’s adopted General Plan contemplated potential annexation actions for these Villages. Should LAFCO approve the annexation of Otay Ranch Village 13 into the City of Chula Vista, city staff will ensure the proposed development is consistent with these General Plan policies. Staff recommends that the City Council support the requested action to approve the resolution in support of the proposed annexation. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council members and has found no property holdings within 1,000 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action. Consequently, this item does not present a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 18702.2(a)(7) or (8), for purposes of the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT All costs incurred by the City preparing this resolution are borne by the applicant, resulting in no net impact to the General Fund or the Development Services Fund. Should the annexation proceed, all costs incurred processing the annexation and associated entitlements would similarly be borne by the applicant. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 153 of 810 P a g e | 3 Approving the resolution indicates preliminary support for the subject annexation; it is not an approval. Should the annexation proceed, all costs incurred processing the annexation and associated entitlements would be borne by the applicant, resulting in no net impact to the General Fund or the Development Services Fund. The fiscal impacts of the annexation would be analyzed and presented to the City Council in conjunction with consideration of the annexation and associated entitlements, including projected revenue generation and costs of providing services to the annexation area. Any projected fiscal deficits would be addressed as part of the project approvals, ensuring no negative fiscal impacts to the City as a result of the annexation. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Map of Village 13 Attachment 2 – Ordinance No. 2578, dated November 9, 1993 Attachment 3 – General Plan Policies Staff Contact: Laura C. Black, AICP, Director of Development Services 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 154 of 810 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1,869 ACRES, KNOWN AS VILLAGE 13 OR THE RESORT FOCUS AREA WITHIN THE PROCTOR VALLEY DISTRICT OF THE UNINCORPORATED EAST OTAY RANCH SUBAREA OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the territory to be annexed, known as Village 13 or the Resort Focus Area within the Proctor Valley District of the Unincorporated East Otay Ranch Subarea, within the City’s General Plan (Fig 5-40, pg. LUT-239), consists of approximately 1,869 acres generally located Northeast of Lower Otay Lake Reservoir with access provided via Otay Lakes Road. The project area is reflected in Exhibit A to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the property ownership, Lakeview 1 LLC and Lakeview 2 LLC, c/o Baldwin and Sons and Moller Otay Lakes Investments, LLC, submitted an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) on September 27, 2022, for its consideration of annexation of the territory into the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the Village 13 territory is adjacent to the eastern boundaries of the City of Chula Vista with future services provided by the City of Chula Vista for the development of this territory; and WHEREAS, the territory described above is within the City’s adopted General Plan and has a land use designation of Planned Community, approved in accordance with Ordinance No. 2578, dated November 9, 1993, which applies as “prezoning” of the subject territory consistent with Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.18.010 until precise zoning is adopted; and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is consistent with General Plan Policy LUT 68.1 – Ensure that services and infrastructure are adequate to accommodate development in Villages 13, 14 and 15 of the Otay Ranch GDP - and General Plan Policy LUT 68.2 – Evaluate for annexation into the City all development areas within those portions of Villages 13, 14 and 15 that require urban-level services; and WHEREAS, the owner’s application to LAFCO requires a certified Council resolution in support of the request for annexation to the City of Chula Vista. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it hereby supports the owner’s application to LAFCO for the annexation of approximately 1,869 acres known as Village 13 or the Resort Focus Area within the Proctor Valley District of the Unincorporated East Otay Ranch Subarea of the General Plan to the City of Chula Vista. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 155 of 810 Presented by: Approved as to form by: Laura C. Black, AICP Glen R. Googins Director of Development Services City Attorney 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 156 of 810 Resolution No. Page 3 Exhibit A – Existing Village 13 Boundary 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 157 of 810 Existing Village 13 Boundary 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 158 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 159 of 810 Ordinance No. 2578 Page 2 with other descriptions or references to the Project herein contained); and, C. Memorandum of Understanding. WHEREAS, on August 1, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution No. 15220, adopted a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego to establish a joint planning project approach and team for the processing of the Otay Ranch Project, including among others, a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan, and Environmental Impact Report; and, WHEREAS, said MOU empowered an Interjurisdictional Task Force (ITF) to establish Goals, Objectives and Policies which would guide the preparation of various project alternatives for development of the Otay Ranch; and, WHEREAS, all the staff and Planning Commission preparation and recommendations regarding the Project have been made in accordance with said MOU, and this Resolution is being considered and acted upon concurrently with a similar one before the San Diego County Board of Supervisors; and, D. Application for Discretionary Approvals. WHEREAS, on September 8, 1989, the Developer filed applications with the City of Chula Vista for (1) a General Plan Amendment and (2) a Genera 1 Deve 1 opment Pl an, which General Development Plan includes the following supporting plans: Resource Management, Village Phasing, Facility Implementation, and Service/Revenue Plans (''Supporting Plans") and (3) Prezoning (all of which applications may jointly be referred to herein as "Discretionary Approvals Applications"); and, E. Planning Commission Record on Applications. WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary Approvals Applications and/or the Draft PEIR was duly noticed before the Planning Commission at the meetings of April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16, October 7, October 12, October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12, November 20, December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January 27, January 29, February 3, February 10, February 13, February 19, February 24, March 13, March 17, March 24, March 31, April 14, April 22, May 8, May 13, May 18, and October 13, 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held on April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16, October 7, October 12, October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12, -•·-··. ··--·····'···• ...... ,-.. -•,·-· ···"1"···••·· --·--- 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 160 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 161 of 810 Ordinance No. 2578 Page 4 I I I. FPEIR Contents. The FPEIR consists of the following: A. "Final Program Environmental Impact Report -Otay Ranch Project" (EIR 90-01) prepared by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services and dated December, 1992, SCH # 89010154 (two volumes), which contains the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ("DPEIR") distribution date July 31, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments on the DPEIR and Addendum thereto dated October 8, 1993, known as document number C093-225, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk; and, B. Technical Reports to the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Appendices A, Band C, and Volumes I through IX), and C. Comments and Responses to Comments to the DPEIR (all hereafter collectively referred to as "FPEIR 90-01"). IV. FPEIR Reviewed and Considered. The City Counci 1 of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered FPEIR 90-01, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the Candidate CEQA Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations attached to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution (Document Number C093-226), the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution (Document Number C093-227), prior to approving the Project. V. Certification of Compliance with CEQA. The City Council does hereby find that FPEIR 90-01, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista. VI. Independent Judgment of City Council. The City Council finds that FPEIR 90-01 reflects the independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista City Council. VII. Findings for Approval of PC Zone Prezoning. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact -----�--~---------------1 ---·-----------------------------~--. ~ .......... . 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 162 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 163 of 810 Ordinance No. 2578 Page 6 VI I I. H. Many areas adjacent to the Project are either permanent open space or have been developed already. Land use patterns are compatible with all adjacent developed areas and future potential development areas. I. Public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice support the prezoning to PC. Conditional Adoption of Prezoning to PC (Planned Community} zone. The Zoning Maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are hereby amended by adding thereto the following prezoning of property pursuant to Section 19.12.020 of said Code which zoning shall be subject to the General Conditions set forth herein below and become effective at and upon the date the subject property is annexed to the City of Chula Vista: That certain property consisting of approximately 22,509 acres located south of Jamul, two miles north of the United States­Mexico border, abutting the current western boundary of Chula Vista, and bounded on the east by State Route 94 to PC (Planned Community}, as shown on Attachment G hereto. IX. General Conditions of Approval. The foregoing discretionary approval, stated to be conditioned on ''General Conditions,'' is hereby conditioned on the occurrence of the General Conditions as set forth in Section IX of the Discretionary Approvals Resolution. X. Consequence of Failure of Conditions. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City sha 11 have the right to revoke or modify a 11 approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits, deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Ordinance. XI. Candidate Findings of Fact, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations. -·····----··---···---- 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 164 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 165 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 166 of 810 Ordinance No. 2578 Page 9 ATTACHMENT G ....., r·•"'\ :-----r··-·· ....._; r' �·� � ' I 1 r C7TAY aANal BOUNDAltY ,----•. ..., I ,....._ .... rE .. ., \ ;_ .. 7 i r.::•..J ! NAJ'. i i • .! i __ ::] '"1 __ .... , --·� ; PREZONE TO PC r.-�-j i-, ,-, i (PLANNED COMMUNITY) .L.---iNA0• J'. ) r--, 11�.. • a...; i ./... l r···'-'. \ ___ ) __ /..-'··-v·/ '-' \. ,.,.sfI.AKE UJYD s .. :.,p PARCELS � ·-1 )....... 7 < .. � _./ ) (NOT A PART OF PREZO-"£! • f: .. _ _, r"°7 , / ,.. ··, .. )r""· :'._, ___ .... ' i ; /. NA.P. '-. . •''\ : j '-I l .. / ,.�_;;;:-:·· \ r-t' r 7 i'f.. ' .. r·� '-,---, L �':,'-'-..\AP \ � i :...., i ] " . .__ __ a••----........ 1 L ... � ) ... , : ' �J' � �---� ,,. r.f, ' � .···-r··...i \ i:.�-:'.!/ i •..• . . .._� j \,...-••---I �- ' :• u�-= OF SAN DIEGO IURJSDJCT10N /NOT A PART OF PREZONE! NAP .• NOT A PAX!" OP PIIEZONING C OTAYRANCH PREZONEMAP ·--·-.... ----------------------------------- \ ____ .. , N.A.P. :-<" - L NOTTOSCAU! 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 167 of 810 Ordinance No. 2578 Page 10 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 9th day of November, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Council members: ABSENT: Council members: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: ATTEST: /) <:.-fj/,.,,/ (; ·• L ·J-uL• Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk STATE OF CA LIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA Horton, Moore, Rindone Fox, Nader None None Tim Nader, Mayor I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2578 had its first reading on October 28, 1993, and its second reading and adoption at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 9th day of November, 1993. Executed this 9th day of November, 1993. Authelet, City Clerk .• I (i / ,•• ,, ~ 'd--d .: .. vt'. ,_, ____ ,.,_. ------'-••-·-··-----·--·~-----------------------2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 168 of 810 East Planning Area Unincorporated East Otay Ranch Subareas Figure 5-40 3DJH/87 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 169 of 810 LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER 5 LUT 67.2 Consider land use amendments to the General Plan. Otay Ranch General Development Plan, -and the Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan for land that has been acquired for open space preservation in accordance with adopted habitat conservation plans to be redesignated from low density residential to open space. Annex to the City development areas in the Proctor Valley or San Ysidro Mountain parcels of the Otay Ranch that require urban-level services from the City or that otherwise relate strongly to the City. Policies LUT 68.1 LUT 68.2 Ensure that services and infrastructure are adequate to accommodate development in Villages 13, 14, and 15 of the Otay Ranch GDP Evaluate for annexation into the City all development areas within those portions of Villages 13, 14 and 15 that require urban-level services. 10.4.3 Master Planned Communities Subarea Description of Subarea The Master Planned Communities within the East Plannin�J Area are listed below and their boundaries are shown on Figure 5-41. Master Planned Communities Subareas: •Rancho del Rey •Eastlake •Sunbow •San Miguel Ranch •Rolling Hills Ranch •Bonita Long Canyon •Otay Ranch Villages One and One West Five, Six and Eleven Page LUT-240 City of Chula Vista General Plan Chula Vista Vision 2020 Objective - LUT 68 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 170 of 810 From: Rebecca Rapp < Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2022 4:22:38 PM To: Jill Galvez <jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas <acardenas@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann <jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla spadilla@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment - New York Post titled ‘San Diego seeing up to 37 marijuana cases a day – mostly psychosis Good evening mayor Salas and council members. My name is Becky Rapp, I’m a parent to three teens and public health educator concerned with the growing number of teens and young adults suffering from mental health disorders. The numbers are staggering and only climbing. I’m unable to attend in person tonight but wanted to share with you an article that posted last week in the New York Post titled ‘San Diego seeing up to 37 marijuana cases a day – mostly psychosis.’ Wow, San Diego County is making headlines in New York pointing out the devastation caused by high- potency marijuana products being sold and consumed by young people and its negative impact on our Emergency Rooms. Dr. Roneet Lev, an addiction medicine doctor at Scripps Mercy Hospital was quoted, as stating, “We’re now counting 37 cannabis-related diagnoses a day, it’s been steadily increasing over the years. When I started in the 90’s, there was no such thing. Now I see 1-2 cases per shift. And the most common symptom is psychosis.” Ben Cort, who runs a drug and alcohol treatment center stated, “We probably see 20 THC -induced psychosis cases for every one amphetamine-induced psychosis cases. What’s even more concerning is that the article goes on to quote neuroscientist, Christine Miller, an expert on psychotic disorders, she states “One clinical study showed that a moderate dose of pure THC causes psychotic systems in about 40% of people who lack a family history of psychosis. As Policymakers, it’s crucial you look at all sides of this issue. Consulting local doctors and scientists is pertinent to the public health, safety, and welfare of Chula Vista residents. Please take this into consideration and invite healthcare professionals to the table for discussion. Thank you Warning: External Email Written CommunicationsPublicComments - Rapp Received 11/1/22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 171 of 810 kjtbllse, e6ar&400-4& mdl-.01,7 Mayor Mary Salas Chula Vista City Hall 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Good Day Mayor Salas: I am hoping you will take the time to read this additional input on the proposed consolidation of the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission and the Chula Vista Commission on Aging. A. THE CREATING AN AGE -FRIENDLY CITY REPORT This report was adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on July 10, 2018. This comprehensive report provided the following commission definitions (page9). Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission (HCVAC): The HCVAC was formed in April 2016 as an implementation measure of the Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan (HCVAP). The commission consists of nine members: five experts in the focus area of the HCVAP and four residents that represent each of the City Council Districts. Working with Healthy Chula Vista Initiative staff from the Development Services Department, the commission oversees implementation of over 60 strategies within the HCVAP that address public health issues and overall well-being of residents through policy and programs to improve the City's physical and social environments, promote awareness and access to services, and build community partnerships. Commission On Aging (COA): The COA was formed to advise city staff and Council on matters affecting older residents of the city. The commission consists of seven members who are representative of the total racial, religious, ethnic and social spectrum of senior citizens. Members take steps to develop a mutual understanding and respect between seniors and the balance of the community, review existing programs and recommend modifications, and provide a forum where older citizens may voice their concern and suggestions. The COA works with the Community Services Department Recreation staff to develop programming for older adults throughout the city and t the Norman Park Senior Center. In January, 2018, both commissions voted to serve as the "Age -Friendly Joint Task Force" as a way of keeping the Age -Friendly initiative on track. OBSERVATIONS 1. Both commissions were formed to pursue independent goals and purposes and deemed necessary by the City Council. 2. The commissions were tasked to serve as the "Age -Friendly Joint Task Force" as a way of keeping the Age -Friendly initiative on track. There was no decision to consolidate these commissions as their independent responsibilities were important enough to act as independent commissions. 3. The "Goals and Objectives" (Appendix 1) assign specific, independent, non -overlapping responsibilities for both commissions to manage. 4. The responsibilities of the HCVAC have further expanded to manage city wide projects (such as Harborside Park and community health programs) further stretching the commission resources. QUESTIONS 1. There was City Council consensus in 2018 that both independent commissions were necessary. What has changed now that additional emphasis is being placed on senior programs and issues? 2. There is concern that adding the additional responsibilities of the COA will result in diverting attention from the recognition and development of programs and activities for seniors and achievement of the COA goals and objectives. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 172 of 810 Mayor Mary Sa|as Chula Vista City Hall 27GFourth Avenue Chula Vlsta,C4 91910 B CONSOLIDATION PROPOSAL DATA SOURCE The consolidation proposal used data (see attachment 1) from ten cities of similar population size. The data identified the population and the corresponding number of commissions for each city. |tdid not identify the types ofcommissions within each city. Ofthe ten cities compared: One city (San Bernardino) listed their senior services under their Commission. This is amine(9) member commission, .....charged with advising the Mayor, City Council and City staff on community needs for the purpose ofestablishing City priorities, goals and objectives with respect to parks, recreation and community services, youth services, and senior services. Seven cities listed some form of "'Senior" or "'Aging" council or commission: ; Anaheim (Senior Citizens Commission), Stockton (San Joaquin County Commission on Aging), Riverside Commission on Aging), Irvine (Senior Citizens Council), Fremont (Senior Citizens Commission), Moreno VaUey(SeniorCitizens Advisory Board) and Oxnard (Senior Services Commission) all have either m Two cities (Santa Ana and Bakersfield) did not identify a senior related commission. OBSERVATIONS Even with fewer commissions 80% of the cities used to support the commission consolidation proposal maintain some form of "Senior" or "Aging" council or commission. QUESTIONS If the data city sources understand the importance of the need for some form of "'Senior" or "Aging" council or commission why is Chula Vista downplaying the recognition of this important population niche? C. WHY NOT TO CONSOLIDATE THE HCVAC AND THE COA The Commission on Aging was formed to pursue independent goals and purposes affecting older residents of the city and repeatedly deemed necessary by the City Council. The Commission on Aging serves as an integral partner on the "Age'Friend|yJoint Task Force" as a way of keeping the Age -Friendly initiative on track. The Commission On Aging has developed an aggressive set of goals and objectives designed to complement the responsibilities assigned in the AGE -FRIENDLY CITY report "Goals and Objectives" Appendix l). The responsibilities of the HCVAC have further expanded to manage city wide projects (such as Harborside Park and community health programs) further stretch/ng the commission resources. O. NET RESULT If the HCVAC and the COA DO NOT KONS00DATEthe net result will still be a reduction of six commissions. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 173 of 810 Mayor Mary Salas Chula Vista City Hall 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 E RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Reconfirm the appointment of both the HCVAC and AOC to serve as the "Age -Friendly Joint Task Force" and assign both specific tasks as a way of keeping the Age -Friendly initiative on track. 2. Implement the responsibilities assigned in the AGE -FRIENDLY CITY report "Goals and Objectives" Appendix 1). 3. Once established reconfirm the understanding of the responsibilities and authorities of the Staff Liaisons and Commissioners. 4. Increase the COA meeting frequency to monthly meetings to achieve the stated goals and objectives. 5. Allocate an operating budget for the COA based on projected programs and activities. Thank you for taking the time to read this information and voting to NOT APPROVE the proposed consolidation of the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission and the Commission On Aging. Sincerely, Tim Aufmuth 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 174 of 810 By Comparison Agency Population FTE Commissions Positions Boards Bakersfield 407615 11960 10 Anaheim 345,940 21040 15 Stockton 322,120 11769 lg Riverside 317,262 21626 19 Santa Ana 3091441 1,342 lO Irvine 309,031 891 21 Chula Vista 2771220 1,226 24 Fremont 227,514 995 15 San Bernardino 2221203 756 14 Moreno Valley 211,600 352 11 Oxnard 201,879 2/439 10 Fontana 210,761 GOS 2 Senior Citizen Commission San Joaquin County Commission onAging Commission on Aging Senior Citizen Council Commission onAging Senior Citizens Commission Commission This is a nine (9) member commission, established by Resolution No. 2Ol8~47 charged with advising the Mayor, City Council and City staff oncommunity needs for the purpose ofestablishing City priorities, goals and objectives with respect toparks, recreation and community services, youth services, and senior services; and evaluating community agencies and organizations receiving City funds for the purpose of providing recreation services, youth and senior services. Senior Citizens' Advisory Board 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 175 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 176 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 177 of 810 P a g e | 1 November 1, 2022 ITEM TITLE Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force Recommendations and City Council Action Regarding: Columbus Statue Disposition, Discovery Park Renaming, and a Proposed Framework for Future Related Actions Location: Discovery Park, 700 Buena Vista Way, Chula Vista, CA 91910 Department: Administration Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines. Recommended Action The Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force recommends that City Council develop a policy for the Installation, Removal, and Disposition of Monuments and Naming and Renaming City Assets; consider proposals to rename Discovery Park; and consider proposals for marker language to former site of Columbus Statue. City Council may take alternative action(s) as deemed appropriate. SUMMARY Over the course of seven meetings, the Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force (Task Force) (a) solicited and considered proposals for disposition of the Columbus Statue, (b) adopted a Framework for Monument Installation and Naming and Renaming City Assets, (c) adopted four recommended names for the renaming of Discovery Park, and (d) adopted proposed language for a marker that should be placed at the former site of the Columbus Statue at Discovery Park. The Task Force recommendations on these items are now presented for City Council consideration and action. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment; 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 178 of 810 P a g e | 2 therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION At a Special Meeting of the Chula Vista City Council on May 25, 2021, the City Council voted to permanently remove the Christopher Columbus Statue (Statue) at Discovery Park, designated October 12 as Indigenous Peoples Day in the City of Chula Vista and later, on September 28, 2021, appointed members to serve on the Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force (Task Force). The Task Force was made up of members of the Human Relations Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, Cultural Arts Commission, Kumeyaay community, Sons and Daughters of Italy, scholar/historian, and an at-large community member. The Task Force was charged with recommending (1) disposition of the Christopher Columbus Statue, (2) proposals for replacement of the existing Columbus Statue with a marker/art piece at the Statue site and language for site marker/art piece, (3) proposals for renaming of Discovery Park, (4) proposals for framework for receiving and/or installing of public memory, monuments, and gifts, and (5) proposals for a framework for naming parks and/or other City facilities. The members of the Task Force are listed in the chart below: Name Commission/Perspective Ricardo Medina, Chair Human Relations Commission Beatrice Zamora, Vice Chair At-Large Community Member Briana Conser Parks and Recreation Commission Salvatore Denaro Sons and Daughters of Italy Chairwoman Angela Elliott-Santos Kumeyaay Nation Nicole Enriquez Parks and Recreation Commission Roberto Hernandez Scholar/Historian Lee Kohse Cultural Arts Commission Nadia Kean-Ayub Human Relations Commission Lorise Maynard Cultural Arts Commission Chairwoman Erica Pinto Kumeyaay Nation The Task Force held its first meeting on November 15, 2021 and adopted a Work Plan and established two Ad-Hoc Subcommittees, Disposition Ad-Hoc Subcommittee and Framework Ad-Hoc Subcommittee, to implement the Work Plan. During the time the Task Force began their work, the City received communication from Angeles Meza, the daughter of the Statue sculptor- Mario Zamora. Angeles Meza resides in Mexico City and inquired about the status of the Statue. After several attempts to contact her, the City has not received a response. The most recent attempt was October 25, 2022. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 179 of 810 P a g e | 3 Due to an inability to communicate with Angeles Meza, the Task Force decided to move forward with their deliberations on Statue disposition. On October 20, 2022, the Task Force concluded their deliberations, and their recommendations are detailed in the sections below. Statue Disposition and Framework Recommendation The Task Force approved a Request for Statements of Interest (RFI), included as Attachment 1, for acquisition of the Columbus Statue which was advertised for 60 days. The Task Force received one Statement of Interest from the Sons and Daughters of Italy included as Attachment 2. While a Statement of Interest was not received by any other organization, the Task Force did receive a public comment from Vincent Ferrer at McMillin Companies expressing interest in ownership of the Statue. See Attachment 3. At its final meeting on October 20, 2022, after deliberation, the Task Force rejected the proposal from Sons & Daughters of Italy based on the lack of a permanent location and limited details on how the organization would contextualize the Statue. The Task Force deferred disposition of the statue using the recommended framework. The Task Force adopted a Framework for Monument Installation and Naming/Renaming of City Assets (Framework) included as Attachment 4. The Framework includes, among other things, tenets, values, guidelines, processes and procedures for monument installation, removal, and disposition, as well as naming and renaming of City Assets. Per the adopted Framework, and due to the inability of the Task Force to make an advisory recommendation to City Council regarding disposition, the Statue is recommended to remain in City storage for three years or as determined by the City Manager. After three years, the City Manager will initiate a new cycle of the monument disposition process which could entail a reiteration of the process followed by this Task Force. Proposals for Renaming Discovery Park The Task Force’s intention is that the proposed names for renaming Discovery Park would be submitted through the renaming process identified in the proposed framework. The Task Force adopted a list of four recommended names for Discovery Park listed below in order of priority: 1. Name: Kuuskilsh Rationale: means "thick lipped" from the giant face in the landscape starting at the Kuchamaa mountain as the forehead, Otay mountain as the nose and San Diego Bay the mouth. It is a Kumeyaay honoring of geographic locations and topography of the area. Nominated by: Mike Connolly Miskwish, Kumeyaay tribal member and adjunct professor at San Diego State University 2. Name: Mat Tipaay “The Peoples Land” Rationale: Honoring the original peoples and acknowledging their presence. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 180 of 810 P a g e | 4 Nominated by: Dr. Stan Rodriguez, member of Santa Ysabel Band of the Iipay Nation, Tribal Councilman, Director of Kumeyaay Community College 3. Name: Kanap Uuyaw “Telling Knowledge” Rationale: Correcting falsehoods of the past. Nominated by: Martha Rodriguez, member of the Kumiay Nation from San Jose de las Zorras, known as Mat’perhaw, located in Baja California, Mexico 4. Name: Kumeyaay Park of Chula Vista Rationale: Original peoples or the first people. Nominated by: Lorise Maynard, Chula Vista Cultural Arts Commission & Task Force Member Proposals for Marker Language The Task Force adopted two recommended versions of marker language to be placed at the site of the former Columbus Statue. The first option would be used if a new monument has not been selected. The second option would be used if a new monument has been selected. Option 1: Marker language without new monument This park lies on the land of the Kumeyaay, the original caretakers of the territories extending from present-day Ensenada to Oceanside and from the Pacific Ocean to the Colorado River. [Park Name] honors the ______. [Elaborate on new name] On this site, previously named Discovery Park upon its founding in 1990 as part of the commemoration of the quincentennial of the so-called “discovery of the new land”—stood a statue of Christopher Columbus. After years of protests by local Kumeyaay, other Indigenous peoples, supporters, and city residents, in 2021 the Chula Vista City Council voted to remove the statue and rename the park. We offer this in the spirit of not “erasing history” but rather as a necessary and reciprocal healing of the harms and injustice of colonial erasure and the distortion of history. Option 2: Marker language with new monument This park lies on the land of the Kumeyaay, the original caretakers of the territories extending from present-day Ensenada to Oceanside and from the Pacific Ocean to the Colorado River. [Park Name] honors the ______. The monument _____ points to ______. [Elaborate on the monument and new name] * * * * * On this site, previously named Discovery Park-- upon its founding in 1990, as part of the commemoration of the quincentennial of the so called “discovery of the new land” -- stood a statue of Christopher Columbus. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 181 of 810 P a g e | 5 After years of protests by local Kumeyaay, other indigenous peoples, supporters, and city residents, in 2021 the Chula Vista City Council voted to remove the statue. We offer this in the spirit of not “erasing history” but rather as a necessary and reciprocal healing of the harms and injustice of colonial erasure and the distortion of history. No further consideration or action was taken regarding a marker/art piece to replace the Statue. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT N/A ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of the disposition process recommended by the Task Force would require significant amount of staff time. ATTACHMENTS 1. Request for Statements of Interest for Columbus Statue 2. Sons and Daughters of Italy Statement of Interest 3. Public Comment- Vincent Ferrer, McMillin Companies 4. Framework for Monument Installation and Naming/Renaming City Assets 5. Draft- Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force Oct. 20, 2022 Meeting Minutes Staff Contact: Adrianna Hernandez, Special Projects Manager, City Manager’s Office Anne Steinberger, Marketing and Communications Manager, City Manager’s Office 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 182 of 810 REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF INTEREST (RFI) Issuing Agency: City of Chula Vista Issue Date: June 15, 2022 RFI #, RFI Title: RFI# 22-001 Acquisition of a Christopher Columbus Bronze Statue Responses Due: August 13, 2022 at 5 p.m. SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION On May 25, 2021, the Chula Vista City Council considered and approved the permanent removal of the Christopher Columbus statue and at their September 28, 2021 Council meeting, appointed a Task Force to consider, among other things, recommending a disposition of the statue for City Council consideration. The Christopher Columbus and Discovery Park Task Force is seeking statements of interest to transfer ownership of a statue/outdoor bronze sculpture (“Statue”) created by Mario Zamora, a world- renowned artist, to an entity, upon terms deemed by the Task Force to be appropriate and advantageous. From June 15, 2022 through August 13, 2022 at 5 p.m., this offer is extended to any museum, historical society, educational organization, or other entities interested in acquiring statues for relocation and placement. The recipient would be responsible for any and all costs associated with relocating the Statue. Transfer recommendations are subject to City Council approval. The Task Force issues this Request for Statements of Interest (“RFI”) to determine whether, and how many, entities are or may be interested in discussing specific terms for acquisition of the Statue. See Resolution 2021-132. The Statue that is subject of this RFI is a bronze/sculpture of Christopher Columbus, currently being stored at a city facility. Information regarding the Christopher Columbus Statue can be found at: http://collections.si.edu/search/detail/edanmdm:siris_ari_321831 . Note: this RFI is not a solicitation for procurement of goods and/or services; no contract for goods or services will be awarded as a result of this RFI. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 183 of 810 SECTION 2: MANDATORY RESPONSE FORM STATEMENT OF INTEREST SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO CITY RFI # [insert] Provide the following information: Name and Address of Interested Entity and Authorized Representative: Entity Name: _______________________________________________________________ Office [Physical] Address: _____________________________________________________ Contact Name [Authorized Representative]: ______________________________________ Signature of Authorized Representative: _________________________________________ Title: _______________________________ Date: _________________________________ Telephone Number: (___)_____________________________________________________ Entity Website URL: _________________________________________________________ Email: _____________________________________________________________________ Type of Entity [check at least one]: Museum * IRS 501(C)(3)? _____________ [yes or no] Historical Society * IRS 501(C)(3)? _____________ [yes or no] Educational Organization * IRS 501(C)(3)? _____________ [yes or no] Other: ________________ [specify]* IRS 501(C)(3)? _____________ [yes or no] * Attach documentation verifying the type of entity, and your entity’s 501(c)(3) status [if a pplicable] Please provide a brief description of your entity or organization. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 184 of 810 Are you interested in acquiring the Statue for relocation and placement? Yes __________ No __________ Please provide an explanation for your interest and if acquired, how the Statue will be displayed and for what purpose. Explanation may be up to five-pages in length including maps or placement diagrams. * (See Note 1) Note 1: In your explanation above, please also provide the following information: • Organization Mission Statement • Year Organization was established • Location where statue is intended to be displayed • Public access to statue, if any • Knowledge/Experience of Artists’ Moral Righ ts under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA) • Ability to maintain the statue • Ability to fund relocation, maintain and repair the statue Note 2: Any transfer of ownership of the statue to an interested entity would require approval by majority vote of City Council and would be subject to negotiated terms and conditions. The Statue is to be provided in an “AS IS CONDITION.” The recipient of the Statue wou ld have to comply with any and all legal requirements regarding the Artist’s rights under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA). The recipient would be responsible for any and all costs associated with the acquisition and removal of the Statue from city property. The City may also require follow-up questions in-writing and/or in-person. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 185 of 810 SECTION 3. INSTRUCTIONS Process • Submit application within (60) sixty days of issue date at www.chulavistaca.gov/statuetaskforce. • City staff meeting to review completeness of application within approximately (15) days of filing • Potential Columbus and Discovery Park Task Force Presentation/Interview at date to be determined • Selection notices will be distributed Questions regarding this RFI? Contact: Adrianna Hernandez, Senior Management Analyst, Office of the City Manager Telephone: 619-691-5254 Email: Adhernandez@chulavistaca.gov **Responders should NOT submit questions or requests for information to any other City officials or employees. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 186 of 810 1 Adrianna Hernandez From:webmaster@chulavistaca.gov Sent:Saturday, August 13, 2022 11:32 AM To:Adrianna Hernandez Subject:Request for Statements of Interest Entry A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted. Form Name: Request for Statements of Interest (RFI)- Columbus Statue Date & Time: 08/13/2022 11:31 AM Response #: 2 Submitter ID: 104054 IP address: 72.192.175.41 Time to complete: 59 min. , 19 sec. Survey Details Page 1 On May 25, 2021, the Chula Vista City Council considered and approved the permanent removal of the Christopher Columbus statue and at their September 28, 2021 Council meeting, appointed a Task Force to consider, among other things, recommending a disposition of the statue for City Council consideration. The Christopher Columbus and Discovery Park Task Force is seeking statements of interest to transfer ownership of a statue/outdoor bronze sculpture (“Statue”) created by Mario Zamora, a world-renowned artist, to an entity, upon terms deemed by the Task Force to be appropriate and advantageous. From June 15, 2022 through August 13, 2022 at 5 p.m., this offer is extended to any museum, historical society, educational organization, or other entities interested in acquiring statues for relocation and placement. The recipient would be responsible for any and all costs associated with relocating the Statue. Transfer recommendations are subject to City Council approval. The Task Force issues this Request for Statements of Interest (“RFI”) to determine whether, and how many, entities are or may be interested in discussing specific terms for acquisition of the Statue. See Resolution 2021-132. The Statue that is subject of this RFI is a bronze/sculpture of Christopher Columbus, currently being stored at a city facility. Information regarding the Christopher Columbus Statue can be found at: http://collections.si.edu/search/detail/edanmdm:siris_ari_321831. Warning: External Email 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 187 of 810 2 Note: this RFI is not a solicitation for procurement of goods and/or services; no contract for goods or services will be awarded as a result of this RFI. SECTION 2: MANDATORY RESPONSE FORM STATEMENT OF INTEREST SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO CITY RFI # 22-001 Provide the following information: 1. Entity Name Sons of Italy - Fratellanza Garibaldina, Lodge #1627 2. Office [Physical] Address , Escondido, CA 92026 3. Contact Name [Authorized Representative] Salvatore Denaro 4. Title Member of the Board - Immediate Past President 5. Telephone Number 6. Entity Website URL www.sonsofitalysd-1627.org 7. Email 8. Type of Entity [check at least one]: [×] Other (please specify) Cultural/Educational/Charitable/Fraternal Non-profit 9. Is the Entity an IRS 501(C)(3)? (○) Yes 10. Attach documentation verifying the type of entity, and your entity’s 501(c)(3) status [if applicable] STATE EXEMPTION FED ID.pdf 11. Please provide a brief description of your entity or organization 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 188 of 810 3 The Order of the Sons & Daughters of Italy (formerly Order of the Sons of Italy) was founded in 1905 by six Italian immigrants who came to the United States during the great Italian migration (1880-1923) One of the original founders, Giuseppe Carlino, was a sculptor. The order was founded on the principals of liberty, equality and fraternity. It originally focused on improving the life of the early Italian immigrants who were often oppressed and marginalized. The order did so by providing Italian-American immigrants articulate leadership, responsible representation in civic matters, and economic institutions to function for its members. The first lodge was established in California in 1922 and the Fratellanza Garibaldina Lodge #1627 i s celebrating its 90th anniversary in 2022. Today, the Order seeks to address itself to the changing needs of its members. Scholarship grants, funded college aid and assistance programs, leadership in promoting more equitable immigration laws, intense activity in civic and local governmental programs, promoting a more positive tone in public relations to offset the rising tide of anti-defamation are part of the Order’s working programs. We are dedicated to promoting our culture, traditions, language, ancestors' legacy, and contributions to the U.S. and the world. 12. Are you interested in acquiring the Statue for relocation and placement? (○) Yes 13. Please provide an explanation for your interest and if acquired, how the Statue will be displayed and for what purpose. Explanation may be up to five-pages in length including maps or placement diagrams. * (See Note 1) Note 1: In your explanation above, please also provide the following information:  Organization Mission Statement  Year Organization was established  Location where statue is intended to be displayed  Public access to statue, if any  Knowledge/Experience of Artists’ Moral Rights under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA)  Ability to maintain the statue  Ability to fund relocation, maintain and repair the statue Note 2: Any transfer of ownership of the statue to an interested entity would require approval by majority vote of City Council and would be subject to negotiated terms and conditions. The Statue is to be provided in an “AS IS CONDITION.” The recipient of the Statue would have to comply with any and all legal requirements regarding the Artist’s rights under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the California Art Preservation Act (CAPA). The recipient would be responsible for any and all costs associated with the acquisition and removal of the Statue from city property. The City may also require follow-up questions in-writing and/or in-person. See attachment detailing responses to each of the Note 1 requirements. Sons of Italy Statement of Interest re Columbus Statue.docx SECTION 3. INSTRUCTIONS Process  Submit application within (60) sixty days of issue date  City staff meeting to review completeness of application within approximately (15) days of filing 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 189 of 810 4  Potential Columbus and Discovery Park Task Force Presentation/Interview at date to be determined  Selection notices will be distributed Questions regarding this RFI? Contact: Adrianna Hernandez, Senior Management Analyst, Office of the City Manager Telephone: 619-691-5254 Email: Adhernandez@chulavistaca.gov **Responders should NOT submit questions or requests for information to any other City officials or employees. Thank you, City of Chula Vista This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 190 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 191 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 192 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 193 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 194 of 810 Statement of Interest Submitted by Sons & Daughters of Italy, Fratellanza Garibaldina, Lodge #1627 (“Sons of Italy”) Organization Mission Statement We are a national organization of men and women who represent the estimated 17 million Americans of Italian heritage, dedicated to promoting our culture, our traditions, our language, the legacy of our ancestors, and our contributions to the U.S. and the world. We are sons and daughters, grandmothers and grandfathers. We are corporate executives and we are union members…young students and retirees…teachers and attorneys…doctors and firefighters…bakers and Wall Street brokers…and everything in between. We are philanthropists and we are model global citizens with purpose beyond ourselves. And we are proud and patriotic Americans of Italian heritage. We exemplify the very best of what it is to be Italian American. Year Established The Order of the Sons & Daughters of Italy in America (formerly the Order of the Sons of Italy in America) was established in 1905. Lodge #1627, Fratellanza Garibaldina, was established in 1932 in San Diego. Its missions include encouraging the study of Italian language and culture in American schools and universities; preserving Italian American traditions, culture, history and heritage; and promoting closer cultural relations between the United States and Italy. Location of Display Sons of Italy proposes it acquires Mario Zamora’s Columbus Statue (“Statue”) and place the statue in a venue where it can be protected, preserved, and honored as a work of art, while also being available for any member of the public to view. We propose a common arrangement in the art world, specifically placement of the statue on long-term loan in suitable locations. Sons of Italy proposes to initially place the Statue at the Italian American Club in Las Vegas (“IAC”). The IAC was established in 1960 and has a building it owns at 2333 E. Sahara Ave Las Vegas, NV 89104. As a non-profit social club, the IAC is a hub of the Italian-American community, not only within Las Vegas, but for those visiting from around the country. They host concerts, banquets, Bocce tournaments as well as grant scholarships and promote Italian-American culture and heritage. (See https://www.iacvegas.com/) Importantly, the IAC facility is used to host meetings of a number of different non-profit Italian-American organizations including Sons of Italy, Knights of Columbus and others. The facility has large protected rear patio area where the Statue would be placed. Should any member of the public request to see the Statue, they will be allowed to do so. The map view of the IAC can be seen on Google Maps reflecting the rear patio behind the main building. https://www.google.com/maps/@36.145532,-115.1160438,104m/data=!3m1!1e3 Photos of the IAC are included below. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 195 of 810 Public Access to Statue The proposed placement of the statue is on private commercial property. It will be available for any member of the public to view upon request during open hours. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 196 of 810 Knowledge/Experience of Artists Moral Rights under the VARA and CAPA One of the six founding members of the Sons of Italy in 1905 was an Italian-American sculptor, Giuseppe Carlino. The Sons of Italy appreciate there is a great public interest in preserving the integrity of cultural and artistic creations. The Italians as a people are not only known for their contributions to the art world, but have a deep history and cultural values related to the protection and conservation of art in all its forms. Italy is often used as a point of reference in the worldwide conservation community and Sons of Italy views the potential acquisition of the Statue as a great honor that comes with greater responsibility. Our organization appreciates the contributions of art and the need to preserve and protect the artists work and reputation. As such, if granted ownership of the statue, Sons of Italy would take every step possible to ensure this work of art and the reputation of Mario Zamora and his work is protected. The Smithsonian Institution has registered Zamora’s Columbus sculpture as significant to the Italian culture. (See https://collections.si.edu/search/detail/edanmdm:siris_ari_321831?q=%22Zamora%2C+Mario+1920- %22&record=2&hlterm=%26quot%3BZamora%2C%2BMario%2B1920-%26quot%3B) When the statue was commissioned for placement in the Rancho Del Rey community in Chula Vista, it was to honor the spirit of discovery, courage and exploration. This theme was a centerpiece of the community that was built on land that was part of the Spanish land grants. Ability to Maintain the Statue Sons of Italy is a well-established organization with over a century of history. Our organization has the ability to maintain the Statue as needed indefinitely. Ability to Fund Relocation, maintain and repair the statue. Sons of Italy has the ability to fund relocation of the Statue by professionals and will obtain proper insurance for transport. The maintenance and any necessary repair can and will be funded by Sons of Italy. Closing Thoughts The excerpt below is taken from the inaugural address by one of the six founders of the Sons of Italy, Dr. Vincenzo Sellaro on June 22, 1905. It reflects the spirit in which the organization was founded, and the realities of an oppressed people who left their land in order to survive and build a better life. It also reflects the spirit of courage, tenacity, self-improvement, and sense of community that embodied much of the Italian-American spirit. “Today we are gathered together for one main purpose, that I want to believe someday will become a very important part of American history. We are the newest of the immigrants to this great country, and because of the fierce and undeserved prejudice and discrimination that we have had to suffer for nearly two decades, we must begin to work together, for our common good. We must educate ourselves, and insist that our children receive the best and highest education possible. Only through this education will we understand the ways and beliefs of this marvelous adopted country of ours, and be treated as equal 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 197 of 810 and worthy American citizens. We left our native land for a new life, in order to survive. Our former country with its government demonstrated after so many years of trying, that it was simply not capable of providing for us the life we deserved—a decent life, a respectable life. The majority of us have come to these shores as the poorest of all Italians, and the least educated of most of Europe. But today I must also share with you that we are also the most courageous for having made the decision to come here, to have left behind our motherland and our families, in the hope, not to find a new life, but to earn a better one. Where only a few of us, before leaving Italy were fortunate enough to have received an education, many of you-us, have reached these shores as common laborers, tenant farmers, field workers and shepherds, gardeners, fishermen, but just as many as artisans, such as masons, carpenters, stonecutters, bakers, tailors and miners. Second to none has been our contribution of tradesmen, lawyers, teachers, accountants, entrepreneurs, pharmacists, and yes, doctors as wel….. Some say that history has dealt us a lousy hand, being that we are the last to come to America. After all, wasn’t it one of our own who discovered America? I say to them that the others, for the most part, came here with masters, came as slaves in many cases. We, on the other hand, have come of our own accord. We are a free people. It is because of this that today I have a dream, and hope that someday, even if it takes a hundred more years before we are fully accepted, our children and their children’s children, even if they carry a single drop of Italian blood will be able and proud to continue to carry on our traditions, our culture and our language. It is up to us, and what we do today!” 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 198 of 810 October 6, 2022 City of Chula Vista Columbus Statue Task Force 276 F St Chula Vista, CA Sent Via Email Re: Sons and Daughters of Italy Interest in Columbus Statue Dear Task Force Members: The following information is provided in response to your recent requests related to our organization’s interest in the Columbus Status as enumerated below. 1. Could Sons and Daughters of Italy make any assurances regarding language to be used for a plaque? At present, the Sons and Daughters of Italy does not have proposed language. The organization is open to the input of the Task Force in that regard. At a minimum, any plaque would credit the artist for his work. Language on any plaque could be negotiated with the initial suggestion that it be neutral and non-political. 2. What are the plans for the statue after Italian American Club in Las Vegas? Or, will it be on permanent loan there? There are no plans for future placement after the Italian American Club in Las Vegas at this time. The intention would be to have it on semi-permanent loan there with an agreement that if Sons and Daughters of Italy were to acquire a facility in Southern California it would return to the area. Alternatively, despite the long history of the Italian American Club in Las Vegas and its ownership of its building, if the property sold or the business closed, Sons and Daughters of Italy would take possession of the statue and place it at an alternative location. Lastly, in the event that an Italian-American heritage museum were to open in San 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 199 of 810 Diego, the statue would return to San Diego for placement there. There are currently proposals and fund-raising efforts for such a museum in San Diego. 3. Please define the types of locations the Sons and Daughters of Italy would pursue placement at? Specifically, please identify if they are public or private locations. Placement is anticipated at private locations that are open to the public, but not public spaces or property. For example, future locations sought would include museums, cultural centers, or an Italian-American organization’s location. 4. For what purpose, and why, do the Sons and Daughters of Italy want the statue? Context is important in answering this question. The short answer is history and culture. It is also important to note that the answer may vary if you were to ask individual members. The primary response, which we believe is nearly uniform, is the historical relevance of Columbus to the Italian-American immigration story in the late 1800s and continuing through the first several decades of the 20th century when millions of Italian Immigrants came to the United States. This was 400 years after Columbus arrived in America. The majority of Italian-Americans today are the descendants of immigrants who arrived here in the late 1800s through the early 1920s. Many experienced hostility, discrimination and even violence. Many fled poverty and sought opportunities, religious freedom and risked everything when they courageously left their homes and families to pursue a better life. It is also important to note that at that time, Italians identified with the region they were from rather than as a united people. While it is impossible to present a uniform statement as to what Columbus represents to individuals within our organization, there is the acknowledgment that Columbus was a unifying figure among the Italian-American community in the early 1900s. The idea that Italians as a whole should come together to support one another and promote education, success, and continuation of their collective culture was a cornerstone of the establishment of the Sons of Italy more than 100 years ago. Italians remained proud of their individual roots while realizing the strength of coming together. A general holiday (the precursor to formal “Columbus Day”), came on the heels of the infamous lynching of Italian-American men in New Orleans in 1891. When it was recognized as a national holiday in 1937, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s proclamation described Columbus as a “brave navigator” whose voyage “was the culmination of years of bold speculation, careful preparation, and struggle against opponents who had belittled his great plan and thwarted its execution.” The description of Columbus was something many Italian- Americans could related to. Our organization promotes liberty and equality. There is no argument that much of the history of Columbus is inconsistent with the ideals of our organization. He was also brave 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 200 of 810 and bold, like many of the Italian immigrants. Both the good and the bad are part of the history which cannot be erased. 5. Does the Italian American Club in Las Vegas have interest in taking permanent ownership of the statue? No. Many members of the Italian American Club in Las Vegas are also Sons and Daughters of Italy members. The desire is to have a safe place where the statue can be preserved and protected and appreciated as a work of art. Should you have any additional questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. Our organization welcomes the opportunity to work with the City of Chula Vista and this task force. Sincerely, /s/ Sal Denaro Sal Denaro Immediate Past-President 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 201 of 810 1 Adrianna Hernandez From:Vincent G Ferrer Sent:Friday, August 12, 2022 1:08 PM To:Adrianna Hernandez Subject:RE: Friendly Reminder: Deadline Approaching for Columbus Statue RFI Attachments:Personal Recollections regarding Christopher Columbus Statue in Discovery Park.pdf Good afternoon Adrianna, As you know, the McMillin Family and The Corky McMillin Companies have deep roots in Chula Vista, as the homegrown developer and builder of many masterplanned communities within the City and surrounding areas, as well as many philanthropic efforts throughout the community. The Christopher Columbus statue was created for the new Discovery Park in McMillin’s Rancho Del Rey in the early 90’s, and we thought it important to share with the committee and City leaders the history of its commissioning through the personal recollections of Sandy Perlatti, our long-time executive marketing director. Because of our history with its creation, we’re very interested in its future. As an option, if the City through these current efforts is unable to find a suitable home, we’d like you to consider us to be the caretaker of the statue for safe keeping on private property, and subject to whatever conditional requirements the City would impose, including any messaging if it were on display. Please feel free to contact me for any additional questions or information. Respectfully, Vince Vincent G Ferrer EVP | mcmillin, LLC Warning: External Email 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 202 of 810 Personal Recollections regarding Christopher Columbus Statue in Discovery Park, Chula Vista, CA Scott, When I returned to McMillin in January, 1990 from my short hiatus working for Home Capital and the Baldwin Company, we were in the final stages of planning the Grand Opening of Rancho del Rey. Prior to my arrival, Rick Davidson had worked very hard and passionately on the theme for the master-planned community. The creative team wanted to tie Rancho del Rey (Ranch of the King) to the history of the land and to identify with classical Spain’s architecture. They also realized that the 500-yrar anniversary of Christopher Columbus ‘s discovery of America was coming up in 1992. At that time, I believe the creative team to include Gary Meads (Knoth & Meads Advertising Agency), Jim Frampton of Jim Frampton and Associates and Bob Young of Motivational Systems, Inc. I believe ONA was our master-planned landscape company. The sculpture by Mario Zamora was to be the centerpiece of Discovery Park which celebrated the 500-year milestone since Christopher Columbus discovered America. The dates of 1492-1992 were on the bronze plaque installed with the statue. We paid in excess of $100,000 for this lovely bronze statue and it breaks my heart that it has been vandalized and threatened for destruction. Mario Zamora came to our office during the process of creating the statue. He wanted to make sure we had the proper instructions for installing the statue. As I remember, he did not speak English and we had to have a translator. The decision was to show Columbus as an explorer, a discoverer of the new land and thus the name Discovery Park. The emphasis was to be on Christopher Columbus as an explorer and not the highly decorated hero he became once he returned to Spain following his conquest. At this point in time, I don’t believe there was any controversy regarding Christopher Columbus and his contribution to history. Mario Zamora created a small- scale version of the statue for us to approve prior to creating the large, permanent version. It was in Corky’s office for many years. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 203 of 810 Our Community Relations department visited the nearby schools and the students created the colorful tiles that were installed on a dedicated bench in the park. The students were asked to create the tiles with the discovery theme and many of them were depictions of the ships that came over with Christopher Columbus. We were always very proud of the marketing of Rancho del Rey and won awards for the park, the information center, the brochure, advertisements and public relations campaign. The Grand Opening involved guests picking up a mock passport and having it stamped at each of the current selling projects within Rancho del Rey and then turned into the Information Center for a drawing. The grand prize drawing was held for an actual “trip to Spain”. I think it would be nice to see if there is an institution that would like the statue that is affiliated with discovery and history that would not consider the statue to represent the negative aspects of the conquest that are at this point in time so controversial. Do you think the San Diego History Center would consider having it? Just a thought. Carolyn and Joe Shielly have stayed in touch with Rick Davidson if you would like to reach out to him for his personal memories of creating the theme, etc. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 204 of 810 Monument Installation and Naming/Renaming City Assets FRAMEWORK I. Background Statement A. To provide history, context, and rationale for the proposed framework II. Definitions A. To build a common understanding of terms used within the framework III. Tenets and Values A. To remind all stakeholders about the deep values and tenets that root the City of Chula Vista IV. Guidelines A. General rules and instruction about naming City assets and monument installation V. Process and Procedures A. Steps for the application, review, and approval process 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 205 of 810 I. Background Statement On September 28, 2021, the Chula Vista City Council heard public comment from various community members and commissions in order to address the permanent disposition of the Christopher Columbus statue in Discovery Park and the renaming of Discovery Park. Council voted to establish a task force (Columbus Statue Removal Task Force) composed of the Human Relations Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, Cultural Arts Commission, Kumeyaay community, and Sons and Daughters of Italy to address the following items: Disposition of Christopher Columbus statue; renaming of Discovery Park; identifying replacement artwork; and the development of a framework to guide the city with naming/renaming of City assets and installation of future monuments. The City of Chula Vista currently does not have a formal policy regarding the naming or renaming of City assets or monument installation. The City, through its departments, and advisory boards and commissions, has followed a number of processes/policies for naming or renaming its parks, libraries and other City assets, as well as monument installation. The Columbus Statue Removal Task Force utilized various steps in order to develop a framework that would provide the City with a clear protocol for future naming, renaming, and monument installation requests while ensuring transparency and allowing for public participation throughout the process. The task force researched similar efforts, discussions, and policies from surrounding cities, as well as other cities within California, and drew upon best practices from each. The task force developed and approved a framework with the purpose of establishing uniform guidelines for the naming and renaming of City assets, as well as to establish criteria and guidelines for the 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 206 of 810 consideration and installation of monuments deemed by the City to be appropriate. II. Definitions1 City Assets Tangible or intangible items of value that are owned or created by the City, including but not limited to City facilities. This definition does NOT include PUBLIC ARTWORK. City Facility (included in City Assets) Any part of real property or structure owned by the City or for which naming rights or monument installation are conferred by agreement, including, but not limited to parks, libraries, Recreational Facilities buildings, parking facilities, interior or ancillary features that are a part of, or within, a larger facility and other City facilities. Commission Any commission as recognized by the City of Chula Vista City Council and/or City Charter; Commemoration Refers to events on the anniversaries of past events designated of importance to the City. They are typically held annually and often in conjunction with sites or markers of memorialization. Commemoration serves the purpose of continually reinscribing the importance of the original event in public memory. Department Director Appointed director of the department that oversees the City Asset eligible for naming, renaming, or monument installation. The director may assign this responsibility to other department staff within their delegation of authority. 1 Definitions influenced by City of San Diego Council Policy 900 -20, Naming of City Assets 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 207 of 810 Donation or gift A monetary (cash) contribution, endowments, personal property, real property, financial securities, equipment, in-kind goods or services, or any other City Asset that the City has accepted and for which the donor has not received any goods or services in return. For purposes of this Council Policy, the terms “donation” and “gift” shall be synonymous. Donor A person or other legal entity that proposes or provides a donation to the City. Funding Financial or in-kind resources to provide funding that might result in naming or renaming. Funding Source The source of funding which can include individuals, nonprofit organizations, and for-profit entities. Marker Permanent writing on plaques, walls, stone carvings, pavers, bricks, electronic display, or interpretive signs that are temporary or permanent and are used to memorialize; also considered part of a monument it is describing. Memorialization Intentional attempt to give importance to particular people, sites, events, and/or incidents in the historical record of the City through the placement of monuments, plaques, statues or other markers. Indicative of a City narration on the history of itself. Monument Markers, statues, and other similar installations, designed to be permanent, which are installed on City property with City permission. Monuments may be in various forms including statues, fountains, or gardens among other forms of monuments as determined by the City. Naming The selection and approval by the City for the initial 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 208 of 810 naming of a City Asset other than streets within the public right of way. Non-Profit Organization A corporation or an association that conducts business for the benefit of the general public without shareholders and without a profit motive. Public Art In contrast to the presumed permanence of monuments, this includes more temporary installations wherein aesthetic considerations take precedence over historic significance. Approval lies with the Cultural Arts Commission. Renaming The selection and approval by the City of a new name for an existing City Asset other than streets within the public right of way. Work of art While both public monuments and public art/installations can be commonly referred to as ‘works of art’, each carry an important distinction in historical versus aesthetic significance, as well as protocols for approval, as noted in the definitions and guidelines within this document. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 209 of 810 III. Guiding Principles/Tenets/Values ❖ Process Matters as Much as Outcome: The City of Chula Vista aims to take time for quality, move at the speed of trust, and cultivate relationships beyond the life of a single monument and/or name. We strive for a powerful final result that is fueled by intentional and iterative processes. We balance urgency and timeliness with purposeful reflection. We aim to work collectively with Kumeyaay communities when reviewing the region’s history. ❖ Truth Telling and Accountability: We work towards acknowledging a comprehensive and robust history of our region. ❖ Elimination of Prejudice and Discrimination: We acknowledge that the historical and contemporary practices of monument installation and the naming/renaming of public assets has created harm and continues to marginalize communities and community members. The installation of monuments and the naming/renaming of city assets must thoroughly vet efforts, donations, and proposals that may inflame prejudice, bigotry, and discrimination. ❖ Welcoming City: We believe that truly welcoming places have intentional, inclusive and equitable policies, practices, and norms that enable all (especially those marginalized) community members to live, thrive, and contribute fully. ❖ Public Memory and Memorialization is POWER: Monuments, naming, and renaming can convey a powerful connection between Chula Vista and its history, and in some instances its future. It is therefore important that the placement of monuments and the naming/renaming of city assets be limited to circumstances of the highest community-wide importance, to be mindful of the relationship between commemoration and memorialization. 2 2 City of San José, Council Policy 9-14, Monument Policy 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 210 of 810 IV. Guidelines Our communities are dynamic, as they continue to change in many ways. The ethnic and racial compositions of our communities are an integral part of this change, as we have witnessed shifting community demographics over time. The process of monument installation and the naming/renaming of city assets must engage and strive for balance between the concept of permanence in an ever- changing society. Therefore, monuments and the naming/renaming of city assets should have a broad acceptance in a multicultural society while also considering future generations. The City names/renames City assets, installs or accepts City-approved monuments on City property as a form of “Government Speech”, as City recognition of significant events or people, or to provide information from the City on topics approved by the City, as set forth below: a. The contributions of individuals or groups who made a substantial impact upon the City of Chula Vista: b. The history of Chula Vista: c. Historical or cultural influences on Chula Vista; d. Native flora, fauna and wildlife of Chula Vista and the greater South County area; e. Local innovation or creativity that has contributed to Chula Vista’s growth and prosperity; or f. Other criteria selected by City Council and set forth in an amendment to this Policy. Order of Preference: Monument installation and the naming/renaming of city assets are pursuant to the following guidelines in order of preference: 1. Geographic Location. Whenever possible, all City assets will be considered for their geographic location. Creating names and monument installation based on the asset’s geographic location should be considered first. The geographic location may be based on the relationship of the asset to a specific place, neighborhood, major street, regional area of the City or the City’s name if the asset serves the entire 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 211 of 810 community. 2. Other Considerations. Consideration of monuments and names may also include a prominent form of topography, prominent flora, and cultural or historical precedent. 3. Extraordinary Circumstances. Only under extraordinary circumstances and with broad public support will the City consider monument installation and the naming/renaming after a person or group. Monument Installation or an asset may be named in memory, or honor of, an individual, group, or organization if it fulfills the criteria outlined in this policy: i. The person, group, or organization made lasting and significant contributions to the protection of natural or cultural resources of the City of Chula Vista; or ii. The person, group, or organization had a significant positive impact on the lives of Chula Vista’s residents; or iii. The person, group, or organization offered a lifetime of volunteerism and service to the community; iv. The naming of the person, group, or organization does not result in the excessive commercialization of the City asset. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 212 of 810 V. Process and Procedures Monument Review Process ● The City Manager or designee shall provide the initial screening of monument proposals to determine if the proposed monument complies with the provisions of this framework (policy) including without limitation, to evaluate the suitability of the proposed monument site, if any. ● The City Manager (or designee) shall decide whether to forward the proposal for further review or to decline further City consideration of the proposed monument based upon considerations consistent with this framework (policy). ● If the City Manager’s decision is to conduct further review of the proposal, the City Manager or designee, shall refer the proposal to the appropriate department/s for consultation and the City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the proposed site and objectives of the Monument. If there is a doubt regarding the appropriate commission, the City Manager shall determine the appropriate commission for review of the proposal. ● The City Manager or department shall prepare a report for consideration by the commission, and coordinate with all other departments and commissions that are relevant to the proposed monument. ● The commission/s shall review the proposed monument to make an advisory recommendation to the City Manager regarding the monument based upon the factors set forth in this framework (Policy) and the Review Criteria set forth below. Each monument applicant or donor shall be informed in writing of their right to appeal the City Manager’s decision in the monument donation/application materials prepared by the City. ● If a proponent for a proposed monument disagrees with the City Manager’s decision regarding a proposed monument, the proponent may submit a written appeal of the City Manager’s decision to the City Manager within 30 calendar days of the City Manager’s decision. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 213 of 810 ● The City Manager and the overseeing commission/s shall evaluate the merits of the appeal and determine whether to forward the appeal to City Council pursuant to the Council meeting rules. ● City Council shall make a final determination on the approval or denial of the Monument proposal by evaluating (i) the merits of the Monument proposal based upon the criteria set forth in this framework (Policy), (ii) City Manager’s reason for denial, (iii) the results of any staff review of the proposal, and (iv) the recommendations of the appropriate City Commission. Monument Review Criteria ● A proposed monument must conform to the approved Government Speech topics and reflect the values and tenets listed within this framework (policy). The proposed monument is not objectionable to the persons or community including those that the monument is intended to honor. If through the public outreach process, the City Manager finds that a proposed Monument is a source of substantial dissension or discord within the City, the City Manager shall seek further direction from departments and commissions before making a final determination. ● A Monument must be made of durable materials, able to withstand the elements for a minimum of 50 years with minimum maintenance, shall be made of materials resistant to vandalism and graffiti as much as is reasonably possible, shall be of a scale, materials, color and style appropriate and consistent with aesthetics of the proposed location of the Monument and such other reasonable factors as the City Manager determines. ● The Monument proposal has been through community outreach conducted by the group or person suggesting that the City install the Monument, and the installation and maintenance of the Monument is within the priorities of the work plan of the responsible Department. ○ Community Outreach shall be directed to specific interested groups, that can include: i. Public notification of proposed changes through media or a public meeting ii. Outreach to specific local organizations that may be considered 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 214 of 810 stakeholders, i.e., South Bay Community Services, YMCA, Southwestern College, other Non-profit organizations located within the City, local school districts, etc. ● The City may decline to approve or to accept a monument for any lawful reason. ● Monument proposals shall be considered by the applicable (or closest applicable) City commission/s and department/s associated with the proposed location for the monument. That commission shall make a recommendation to the City Manager for approval or disapproval based on consistency with this framework (Policy) and as further described in the Review Process. The City Manager may accept or deny the recommendation from the commission as further provided in the review process. ● The City shall only proceed with the design, fabrication, and installation of a monument after completion of the review process and if the conclusion is to move forward. In reviewing a proposed monument, the relevant departments, the applicable City Commission and City Manager shall review the proposal based upon the criteria set forth in this framework (Policy). Monument Removal Process The City Manager or designee shall provide the initial screening of monument removal proposals to determine if the proposal complies with the provisions of this framework (policy) including without limitation, to evaluate the removal implications on the monument site, if any. The City Manager (or designee) shall decide whether to forward the proposal for further review or to decline further City consideration of the proposal based upon considerations consistent with this framework (Policy). If the City Manager’s decision is to conduct further review of the proposal, the City Manager or designee, shall refer the proposal to the appropriate department/s for consultation and the City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural A rts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the site and objectives of the monument. If there is a doubt regarding the appropriate commission, the City Manager shall determine the appropriate commission for review of the proposal. The department shall prepare a report for consideration by the commission, and coordinate with all other departments and commissions that are relevant to the 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 215 of 810 monument removal proposal. The commission/s shall review the proposal to make an advisory recommendation to the City Manager regarding the monument based upon the factors set forth in this framework (Policy). Each monument removal applicant shall be informed in writing of their right to appeal the City Manager’s decision, found on the monument removal proposal application provided by the City. If a proponent disagrees with the City Manager’s decision regarding monument removal, the propo nent may submit a written appeal of the City Manager’s decision to the City Manager within 30 calendar days of the City Manager’s decision. The City Manager and the overseeing commission/s shall evaluate the merits of the appeal and determine whether to fo rward the appeal to City Council pursuant to the Council meeting rules. City Council shall make a final determination on the approval or denial of the proposal by evaluating (i) the merits of the proposal based upon the criteria set forth in this framework (Policy), (ii) City Manager’s reason for denial, (iii) the results of any staff review of the proposal, and (iv) the recommendations of the appropriate City Commission. If a monument is approved to be removed, consideration should be given to placing a marker to chronicle the event, including the reasons for the decision to do so, and its historic significance. Monument Disposition Process In the case that the City Council approves monument removal, the disposition process is as follows: 1. The City Manager shall refer the responsibility of monument disposition to the appropriate City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the monument site and objectives of the monument. a. At the discretion of the City Council, a special task force may be assembled consisting of the Human Relations Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Cultural Arts Commission, and specific community members/stakeholders. 2. The City Manager shall prepare a report for review by the commission to provide contextual information (ie. monument location, history, removal 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 216 of 810 process), as well as the directives of the framework (Policy) including values, tenets, and disposition process. 3. The City Manager (or designee) disseminates a Requests for Statements of Interest (RFI) for a period of sixty days. The RFI process includes a media press release conducted by the City staff, as well as promotional strategies to inform potential stakeholders. 4. After the closing of the RFI period, the City’s commission or specialized task force reviews all RFIs. The City’s commission or specialized task force may ask the RFI proposers for a follow-up presentation or for additional clarification on the RFI application. 5. The City’s commission or specialized task force shall deliberate on the RFI proposals utilizing the values and tenets listed within this framework (policy), community feedback, and advisement from City Council. 6. When, and if, a RFI proposal attains unanimous approval, the Cit y’s commission or specialized task force shall make an advisory recommendation to City Council. 7. As per the framework, when a monument is removed, consideration may be given regarding the placing of a marker at the site. The City’s Commission or specialized task force may prepare a proposal for a future “marker” that chronicles the event, shares the decision to do so, and its historic significance. The marker, fitting the definition of a monument, then follows the Monument Proposal and Review Process. 8. In the case that the City’s commission or specialized task force is unable to make an advisory recommendation to City Council regarding disposition, the monument will remain in City storage for three years or as determined by the City Manager. After three years, the City Manager initiates a new cycle of the monument disposition process. Naming/Renaming Nomination Process City departments, commissions, task forces, or community members shall submit their naming or renaming proposal to the Department Director depending on asset type. If applicant’s proposal follows the intent of this framework ( Polic y), the Department Director shall make a proposal in writing for naming or renaming of a City Asset as follows: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 217 of 810 ● For library facilities, the Department Director will make the proposal to the Cultural Arts Commission. ● For parks and recreational facilities, the Department Director will make the proposal to the Park and Recreation Commission. ● For other City Assets, the Department Director will make the proposal to the City Manager, who shall refer the proposal to the appropriate department/s and/or City’s commission/s (ie. Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts, Human Relations) most closely associated with the City asset and objectives of the asset. Written proposals must, at a minimum, include the following information: ● The proposed name; ● Reasons for the proposed name, including a discussion of the criteria identified in this policy; ● Written documentation outlining community support for the proposed name; ● If proposing to rename a City Asset, justification for changing an established name. Naming and Renaming Review Process Upon receipt of a naming or renaming proposal for any City Asset, the Department Director reviewing the naming or renaming proposal shall consider the following items in the review, including but not limited to, the following: ● Submit the proposal to appropriate City historical staff to review the California Historic Resources Inventory Database (CHRID) to determine if the City Asset is a Designated Historical Resources with an assigned historic name; ● Ensure that supporting information has been authenticated; ● If the City Asset is a Designated Historical resource listed on the local, State or National Register of Historic Places, any on-site recognition shall comply with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment o f Historic Properties and shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Historical Resources staff according to those standards; ● Ensure compliance with framework (Policy) ● Consider the impact of the naming or renaming to the community; and ● Other City staff may review and provide input on the proposal for naming or renaming. ● Consider the cost of implementation and signage, and identify the funding to cover such costs. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 218 of 810 The Department Director will submit the proposal to the City Attorney’s Office for legal review of the following issues that include, but are not limited to: ○ Ownership rights, by agreement or by law; and Adherence to City policies, as well as any local, state, or federal regulation. If a naming or renaming request is for a library or park, the designated City’s Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider the necessity or desirability of naming the park/facility, and the proposed name and any alternatives. The public hearing will be announced on the commission’s website for at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing. The designated City’s Commission shall prepare a recommendation for action by the City Council. The recommendation shall include no more than three (3) names for the asset that the Commission deemed most appropriate under this framework (policy) and the reason for the Commission’s selections. The City Council will review the staff report and the Commission’s recommendation and take action. The City Council’s selection is final. Non-selected names can be resubmitted for consideration in subsequent years. Name Change Once a name has been selected under this policy, it shall not be changed unless, after an investigation and public hearing, the name is found to be inappropriate because it does not fulfill the criteria laid out in this framework (policy). Review of a name selected under this framework (policy) shall occur only once a year, per the procedure outlined. A facility’s name, once upheld, shall not be reviewed again or changed for fifteen (15) years unless extraordinary circumstances merit, and approval is granted by the City Council. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 219 of 810 1 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS STATUE AND DISCOVERY PARK TASK FORCE Meeting Minutes October 20, 2022, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA Present: Member Conser, Member Denaro, Member Enriquez, Member Hernandez, Member Kean-Ayub, Member Maynard, Vice Chair Zamora, Chair Medina Absent: Member Elliott-Santos, Member Kohse, Member Pinto Also Present: Secretary Hernandez, Communications and Marketing Manager Anne Steinberger Member Hernandez arrived at 6:33 p.m. Member Hernandez departed at 8:55 p.m. ____________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A special meeting of the Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:05 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 276 Fourth Ave Chula Vista, CA 91910. 2. ROLL CALL Secretary Hernandez called the roll. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS No public comment. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 220 of 810 2 4. ACTION ITEMS 4.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes Moved by Vice Chair Zamora Seconded by Member Maynard Task Force approve minutes. Yes (7): Member Conser, Member Denaro, Member Enriquez, Member Kean- Ayub, Member Maynard, Vice Chair Zamora, Chair Medina Result: Carried (7 to 0) 4.2 Consideration of Statements of Interest for Acquisition of the Columbus Statue Including Action to Determine Recommended Disposition Chair Medina introduced the item and discussion ensued. Moved by Vice Chair Zamora Seconded by Chair Medina Reject proposal from Sons and Daughters of Italy based on lack of permanent location and lack of contextualizing of statue and defer disposition of statue to an agreed upon recommended framework. Yes (6): Member Conser, Member Enriquez, Member Hernandez, Member Maynard, Vice Chair Zamora, Chair Medina Abstain (2): Member Kean-Ayub, and Member Denaro Result: Carried (6 to 0) 4.3 Consideration of a Framework for Monument Installation or Removal and City Asset Naming or Renaming Chair Medina introduced the item and discussion ensued including Task Force edits to the proposed framework. Moved by Member Kean-Ayub Seconded by Member Maynard Task Force approve proposed Framework as amended by Task Force for recommendation to City Council. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 221 of 810 3 Yes (8): Member Conser, Member Denaro, Member Enriquez, Member Hernandez, Member Kean-Ayub, Member Maynard, Vice Chair Zamora, Chair Medina Result: Carried (8 to 0) 4.4 Consideration and Possible Action Regarding Proposals for the Renaming of Discovery Park and Proposals for Marker Language Chair Medina introduced the item and discussion ensued. Task Force drafted the following: Option 1: Marker language without new monument This park lies on the land of the Kumeyaay, the original caretakers of the territories extending from present-day Ensenada to Oceanside and from the Pacific Ocean to the Colorado River. [Park Name] honors the ______. [Elaborate on new name] On this site, previously named Discovery Park upon its founding in 1990 as part of the commemoration of the quincentennial of the so-called “discovery of the new land”—stood a statue of Christopher Columbus. After years of protests by local Kumeyaay, other Indigenous peoples, supporters, and city residents, in 2021 the Chula Vista City Council voted to remove the statue and rename the park. We offer this in the spirit of not “erasing history” but rather as a necessary and reciprocal healing of the harms and injustice of colonial erasure and the distortion of history. Option 2: Marker language with new monument: This park lies on the land of the Kumeyaay, the original caretakers of the territories extending from present-day Ensenada to Oceanside and from the Pacific Ocean to the Colorado River. [Park Name] honors the ______. The monument _____ points to ______. [Elaborate on the monument and new name] * * * * * On this site, previously named Discovery Park-- upon its founding in 1990, as part of the commemoration of the quincentennial of the so called “discovery of the new land”-- stood a statue of Christopher Columbus. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 222 of 810 4 After years of protests by local Kumeyaay, other indigenous peoples, supporters and city residents, in 2021 the Chula Vista City Council voted to remove the statue. We offer this in the spirit of not “erasing history” but rather as a necessary and reciprocal healing of the harms and injustice of colonial erasure and the distortion of history. Park Name Recommendations: In order of priority: 1. Name: Kuskilly/ Kuuskilsh Rationale: Definition: means "thick lipped" from the giant face in the landscape starting at the Kuchamaa mountain as the forehead, Otay mountain as the nose and San Diego Bay the mouth. It is a Kumeyaay honoring of geographic locations and topography of the area. Nominated by: Mike Connolly Miskwish, Kumeyaay tribal member and adjunct professor at San Diego State University 2. Name: Mat Tipaay “The Peoples Land” Rationale: Honoring the original peoples and acknowledging their presence. Nominated by: Dr. Stan Rodriguez, member of Santa Ysabel Band of the Iipay Nation, Tribal Councilman, Director of Kumeyaay Community College 3. Name: Kanap Uuyaw “Telling Knowledge” Rationale: Correcting falsehoods of the past. Nominated by: Martha Rodriguez, member of the Kumiay Nation from San Jose de las Zorras, known as Mat’perhaw, located in Baja California, Mexico 4. Name: Kumeyaay Park of Chula Vista Rationale: Original peoples or the first people. Nominated by: Lorise Maynard, Chula Vista Cultural Arts Commission & Task Force Member Moved by Member Medina Seconded by Nadia Kean-Ayub Task Force approve the drafted marker language and four park names to be submitted through the framework process previously approved by Task Force. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 223 of 810 5 Yes (7): Member Conser, Member Denaro, Member Enriquez, Member Kean- Ayub, Member Maynard, Vice Chair Zamora, Chair Medina Result: Carried (7 to 0) 4.5 Authorizing the Chair to Work With Staff to Present Task Force Recommendations to City Council Moved by Member Enriquez Seconded by Member Maynard Approval of authorization of Chair Medina to work with City staff to finalize recommendations. Yes (7): Member Conser, Member Denaro, Member Enriquez, Member Kean- Ayub, Member Maynard, Vice Chair Zamora, Chair Medina Result: Carried (7 to 0) OTHER BUSINESS 5. STAFF COMMENTS 6. CHAIR'S COMMENTS Chair Medina expressed his gratitude to City staff, Attorney Simon Silva and City Attorney Glen Googins and Task Force members for all their hard work and dedication. Future generations will benefit from this process. 7. TASK FORCE MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Zamora expressed appreciation for Chair Medina's leadership, other Task Force members, Member Denaro and City Staff. Member Enriquez thanked everyone and acknowledged City staff's effort. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:04 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Adrianna Hernandez, Secretary _________________________ Adrianna Hernandez, Commission Secretary 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 224 of 810 McMillin Companies, LLC | PO Box 21010, El Cajon, CA 92021 | 619.477.4117 October 26, 2022 City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Christopher Columbus Statue Dear Members of the Chula Vista City Council: As you know, the McMillin Family and The Corky McMillin Companies have deep roots in Chula Vista, as the homegrown developer and builder of many masterplanned communities within the City and surrounding areas, as well as many philanthropic efforts throughout the community. The Christopher Columbus statue was created for the new Discovery Park in McMillin’s Rancho Del Rey in the early 90’s, and we thought it important to share with the committee and City leaders the history of its commissioning through the personal recollections of Sandy Perlatti, our long-time executive marketing director, in her attached memo. Because of our history with its creation, we’re very interested in its future. As an option, if the City is unable to find a suitable home, we’d like your consideration to be the recipient of the statue for a permanent home on private property in Bonita. Respectfully, MCMILLIN COMPANIES Vincent G. Ferrer Executive Vice President 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 225 of 810 Personal Recollections regarding Christopher Columbus Statue in Discovery Park, Chula Vista, CA Scott, When I returned to McMillin in January, 1990 from my short hiatus working for Home Capital and the Baldwin Company, we were in the final stages of planning the Grand Opening of Rancho del Rey. Prior to my arrival, Rick Davidson had worked very hard and passionately on the theme for the master-planned community. The creative team wanted to tie Rancho del Rey (Ranch of the King) to the history of the land and to identify with classical Spain’s architecture. They also realized that the 500-yrar anniversary of Christopher Columbus ‘s discovery of America was coming up in 1992. At that time, I believe the creative team to include Gary Meads (Knoth & Meads Advertising Agency), Jim Frampton of Jim Frampton and Associates and Bob Young of Motivational Systems, Inc. I believe ONA was our master-planned landscape company. The sculpture by Mario Zamora was to be the centerpiece of Discovery Park which celebrated the 500-year milestone since Christopher Columbus discovered America. The dates of 1492-1992 were on the bronze plaque installed with the statue. We paid in excess of $100,000 for this lovely bronze statue and it breaks my heart that it has been vandalized and threatened for destruction. Mario Zamora came to our office during the process of creating the statue. He wanted to make sure we had the proper instructions for installing the statue. As I remember, he did not speak English and we had to have a translator. The decision was to show Columbus as an explorer, a discoverer of the new land and thus the name Discovery Park. The emphasis was to be on Christopher Columbus as an explorer and not the highly decorated hero he became once he returned to Spain following his conquest. At this point in time, I don’t believe there was any controversy regarding Christopher Columbus and his contribution to history. Mario Zamora created a small- scale version of the statue for us to approve prior to creating the large, permanent version. It was in Corky’s office for many years. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 226 of 810 Our Community Relations department visited the nearby schools and the students created the colorful tiles that were installed on a dedicated bench in the park. The students were asked to create the tiles with the discovery theme and many of them were depictions of the ships that came over with Christopher Columbus. We were always very proud of the marketing of Rancho del Rey and won awards for the park, the information center, the brochure, advertisements and public relations campaign. The Grand Opening involved guests picking up a mock passport and having it stamped at each of the current selling projects within Rancho del Rey and then turned into the Information Center for a drawing. The grand prize drawing was held for an actual “trip to Spain”. I think it would be nice to see if there is an institution that would like the statue that is affiliated with discovery and history that would not consider the statue to represent the negative aspects of the conquest that are at this point in time so controversial. Do you think the San Diego History Center would consider having it? Just a thought. Carolyn and Joe Shielly have stayed in touch with Rick Davidson if you would like to reach out to him for his personal memories of creating the theme, etc. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 227 of 810 Christopher Columbus Statue & Discovery Park Task Force Final Proposal to Chula Vista City Council, November 1st, 2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 228 of 810 Historical Background ●Special Meeting of the Chula Vista City Council on May 25, 2021, the City Council voted to permanently remove the Christopher Columbus Statue at Discovery Park ●Designated October 12 as Indigenous Peoples Day in the City of Chula Vista ●September 28, 2021, appointed members to serve on the Christopher Columbus Statue and Discovery Park Task Force 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 229 of 810 Task Force Members 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 230 of 810 Our Charge ●Solicit and consider proposals for disposition of the Columbus Statue ●Adopt a Framework for Monument Installation and Naming and Renaming City Assets ●Adopt recommended names for the renaming of Discovery Park ●Adopt proposed language for a marker that should be placed at the former site of the Columbus Statue at Discovery Park. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 231 of 810 Disposition 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 232 of 810 Learn about the Columbus Statue artist -Mario Zamora (1920-2017) a sculptor from Honduras, active in Mexico -Multiple attempts to communicate with his daughter (via email and phone calls) who had inquired about the status of the statue, in order to get an idea about the family’s wishes. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 233 of 810 Disposition Process: Request For Interest -Approved the questions and process -Advertised for 60 days -C.V. Communications Department put out Press Release -Media, marketing, promotional strategies on behalf of city staff -Articles written (NBC, Fox, ABC) -Outreached to major museums and associations, nationwide and local 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 234 of 810 Review of Proposals -One statement of interest submitted: Sons & Daughters of Italy -Public comment from Vincent Ferrer at McMillan Companies, expressing interest, however no formal submittal -Task Force sent request to Sons & Daughters of Italy for more information 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 235 of 810 Recommendation of Disposition -Decision: Reject the proposal from Sons & Daughters of Italy based on their inability to fulfill the established criteria for the acquisition of the statue -Lack of permanent location -No plan for contextualization of the statue -Maintain statue in storage per the proposed framework 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 236 of 810 Proposed Framework for Monument Installation & Naming/Renaming of City Assets 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 237 of 810 Guiding Principles/Values/Tenets ●Process Matters as Much as Outcome ●Truth Telling and Accountability ●Elimination of Prejudice and Discrimination ●Welcoming City ●Public Memory and Memorialization is POWER 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 238 of 810 Guidelines ●Acknowledgment that any monument installation is a form of “government speech” ●In order of preference… ○Geographic location ○Other Considerations (e.g. prominent flora, cultural/historical precedent) ○Extraordinary Circumstances (person, group, organization) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 239 of 810 Process & Procedures ●Monument Review Process ●Monument Review Criteria ●Monument Removal Process ●Monument Disposition Process* ●Naming/Renaming Nomination Process ●Naming and Renaming Review Process ●Name Change 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 240 of 810 Proposal for Renaming of Discovery Park 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 241 of 810 To be submitted through the renaming process 1.Kuuskilsh Park a.A Kumeyaay honoring of the geographic location and topography of the area 2.Mat Tipay Park a.“The People’s Land”, honoring the original peoples and acknowledging their presence 3.Kanap Uuyaw Park a.“Telling Knowledge”, correcting falsehoods of the past 4.Kumeyaay Park of Chula Vista a.To honor the first people 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 242 of 810 Proposal for Marker Language 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 243 of 810 This park lies on the land of the Kumeyaay, the original caretakers of the territories extending from present-day Ensenada to Oceanside and from the Pacific Ocean to the Colorado River. [Park Name] honors the ______. [Elaborate on new name] On this site, previously named Discovery Park upon its founding in 1990 as part of the commemoration of the quincentennial of the so-called “discovery of the new land”—stood a statue of Christopher Columbus. After years of protests by local Kumeyaay, other Indigenous peoples, supporters, and city residents, in 2021 the Chula Vista City Council voted to remove the statue and rename the park. We offer this in the spirit of not “erasing history” but rather as a necessary and reciprocal healing of the harms and injustice of colonial erasure and the distortion of history. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 244 of 810 This park lies on the land of the Kumeyaay, the original caretakers of the territories extending from present-day Ensenada to Oceanside and from the Pacific Ocean to the Colorado River. [Park Name] honors the ______. The monument ____ points to _____. [Elaborate on the monument and new name] On this site, previously named Discovery Park upon its founding in 1990 as part of the commemoration of the quincentennial of the so-called “discovery of the new land”—stood a statue of Christopher Columbus. After years of protests by local Kumeyaay, other Indigenous peoples, supporters, and city residents, in 2021 the Chula Vista City Council voted to remove the statue and rename the park. We offer this in the spirit of not “erasing history” but rather as a necessary and reciprocal healing of the harms and injustice of colonial erasure and the distortion of history. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 245 of 810 Our Task Force Recommendations ●Disposition -Maintain statue in storage and follow the proposed framework that outlines Monument Disposition ●Marker/Art piece and language-Adopt Task Force’s recommended marker language ●Proposal(s)for renaming of Discovery Park -Adopt Task Force’s recommended proposals for renaming Discovery Park. ●Framework for Monuments (Installation,Removal,Disposition)and naming / renaming parks and/or other City facilities -Adopt Task Force’s framework 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 246 of 810 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 November 1, 2022 ITEM TITLE Privacy and Technology: Citywide Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy Report Number: 22-0280 Location: No specific geographic location Department: City Manager Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution approving a Citywide Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy. SUMMARY The City of Chula Vista adopted a Smart City Strategic Action Plan (Action Plan) in September 2017 , establishing itself as a leader in the growing “smart city” movement, earning recognition locally, nationally, and internationally for its innovative planning approach to using technology to create a more efficient and effective government. As a smart city, Chula Vista continues to leverage innovative technology and data tools to better serve and engage citizens, enhance sustainability, improve public safety, and promote local economic development. The Smart City Strategic Action Plan adopted in 2017 aims to help the City of Chula Vista:  Become more responsive by working with our communities, residents, and businesses to improve city operations and services, including public safety and citizen engagement  Become more transparent by using data and analytics to improve city services and operations, and ensuring public access to city performance indicators  Lay the groundwork for economic development to attract new businesses, and help grow and support current Chula Vista businesses On January 18, 2022, as part of the on-going implementation of the Action Plan, City Council approved an agreement for the City of Chula Vista to engage Madaffer Enterprises (Madaffer) to provide support for the development of a Citywide Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy (Policy). A key step in this 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 247 of 810 P a g e | 2 effort was the establishment by the City Manager of a Task Force of Chula Vista residents and stakeholders who worked with the public and City staff over a period of six months to develop policy recommendations for consideration in the development of the citywide policy. This staff report outlines the process of the citywide policy development, including the role of the task force, robust community engagement efforts, the findings of a public opinion survey and observations from six focus groups conducted as part of this effort. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed Project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the Project qualifies for a Class 8 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15308 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment) of the state CEQA Guidelines. The proposal seeks to help address the local threat of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and lowering vulnerability to anticipated climate change impacts. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. In addition, notwithstanding the foregoing, the Development Services Director has also determined that the Project qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION The Smart City Strategic Action Plan was adopted to serve as a roadmap and outline goals, objectives and initiatives that will help the city achieve its smart city vision. The Smart City Strategic Action Plan is built around ten primary objectives that are organized into four overarching goals. Each objective is supported by several initiatives and action steps. City staff continues to work with department heads and key stakeholders on progress toward implementation of the various initiatives. The continued progress and the impacts of initial smart city efforts are enhancing city operations and services, saving taxpayer dollars, improving public safety, and promoting economic development by encouraging business growth and jobs. Chula Vista continues to work with our regional partners, including the Port of San Diego, SDG&E, SANDAG, Caltrans, City of San Diego and Cleantech San Diego to identify opportunities for successful deployment of smart city technologies. The City will continue to ensure that our smart city initiatives are sustained by long-term stakeholder engagement across our region. Citywide Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy A key goal of the Smart City Strategic Action Plan is to continue efforts to become a more open and transparent City. To support this goal, the City has set an objective to maximize the use of data and analytics to improve services and increase public access to City information. This effort also involves ensuring that technology, including public data and information collected is stored, managed, and utilized in a secure, transparent, and safe way. The development of a Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency (Policy) is a tool for the City to enhance the safe and effective use of technologies and improve protection of public data. The Policy also will help to advance City Council priorities to improve City policies for adoption of new technologies, public data management, security, and privacy. As part of our deeper commitment to good data practices and data stewardship, the City has developed this Policy to serve as a guide for all City departments. The development of this Policy was guided by the policy recommendations adopted by the Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force (Task Force) on September 26, 2022. The policy will govern privacy protection and data management processes, as well as the use of 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 248 of 810 P a g e | 3 technology in City operations and services, including public safety, traffic management, community services, economic development, and other service areas of the City. Why is it important for Chula Vista to adopt a Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy? The Policy will:  Establish guidelines and standards to effectively protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of City of Chula Vista data, digital information, and technology systems.  Increase public trust and confidence by making City data management policies and processes more transparent and easily accessible to City residents so they can better understand how the City protects their data.  Establish a commission of diverse stakeholders focused on technology privacy and innovation that will help guide Policy implementation.  Improve the dialogue between residents and the City by allowing for a better understanding of data collection, data use and management services the City provides, while addressing input on what matters most to Chula Vista residents.  Develop effective measures to protect the City of Chula Vista and its residents, businesses, and other stakeholders from illicit use of City of Chula Vista technology systems and related data. Summary on Project Scope and Deliverables: On January 18, 2022, City Council directed staff to develop a privacy protection and technology transparency policy and approved an agreement for the City of Chula Vista to engage Madaffer Enterprises (Madaffer) to provide support for the development of this policy. Below is a summary of the services Madaffer Enterprises provided to the City of Chula Vista under the scope of this project:  Assisted in the establishment and facilitated the work of the task force on technology and privacy.  Assisted in communicating the work of the task force to Chula Vista residents and the public.  Conducted a round of consultations with department heads and managers to understand existing or planned technologies or policies that may be within the scope of the task force.  Coordinated with a public opinion research consultant to conduct scientific, non-biased public opinion polling and focus groups to gather input from Chula Vista residents regarding technology privacy and innovation and potential privacy guidelines.  Organized and coordinated a series of community meetings and interviews with community-based organizations, privacy experts, academics, and City staff.  Provided project management and coordination, including weekly calls and monthly meetings with department heads to share progress reports and solicit input from senior City staff. Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force: In April 2022, the Chula Vista City Manager appointed 12 individuals to the Chula Vista Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force (Task Force), including residents with expertise in technology, education, law enforcement, small business, and civil rights. The Task Force was charged with providing to the City Manager policy recommendations for consideration in the development of a policy on technology and privacy issues. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 249 of 810 P a g e | 4 Selection of Task Force Members: Beginning February 2022, City staff implemented outreach efforts to announce that the City was seeking individuals who were interested in serving on a technology and privacy advisory task force. An online application was posted on the City website and was made available for 30 days. The City received 57 applications. The pool of applicants was narrowed down to 21 by the City Manager and a selection committee which included three current or former leaders of important organizations in Chula Vista: Beatrice Zamora, Arnulfo Manriquez, and Dr. Francisco Escobedo. The final 21 applicants were interviewed by the City Manager and based on those interviews, the City Manager selected 12 candidates to serve on the Task Force. Each member appointed to the Task Force was chosen because they represented a diverse and important perspective and were determined to be fair and reasonable in their approach to the issues of privacy and technology in local government. On April 25, 2022, the Task Force convened its first meeting in the City Council chambers. Goals & Objectives of the Task Force: The Task Force studied City technology, worked with key stakeholders in the community, and city staff to develop informed policy recommendations designed to help the City protect individual privacy and enhance technology oversight while delivering excellent public service. The Task Force received presentations from City staff and other experts on how the City is using technology, how other cities are using technology, existing laws regulating privacy and the use of technology and information security. Task Force members also participated in two community meetings in Chula Vista. To ensure openness and transparency of the entire process, the City published all task force meeting agendas 72 hours in advance. In addition, all task force meetings were broadcast live on the City website and are available in the meeting archive. The City publicized Task Force meetings inviting public comments via social media, City newsletter and press releases. Task Force Subcommittees: Over the course of the six-month period, ten Task Force meetings were conducted, two departmental on-site tours were convened, and two community meetings were held. On August 1, 2022, in order to begin the process of deliberation and further review of policy recommendations, the Task Force established the following six subcommittees: • Procurement • Data Retention • Use Policies • Policy Oversight & Transparency • Privacy Advisory Board • Information Security Each subcommittee was composed of a minimum of two Task Force members and these subcommittees provided initial draft policy recommendations. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 250 of 810 P a g e | 5 Opportunities for Public Input & Community Engagement: The City of Chula Vista is committed to openness and transparency as outlined in the goals of our smart city strategic plan adopted in 2017. Ensuring opennesss and transparency of the Task Force meetings and processes was critical. To ensure that all Chula Vista residents and community members would be able to participate in this process and with the Task Force, the City established the following channels of communication: • The City established a dedicated website for public access to all task force meeting agendas, meeting minutes, e-comments and live streaming at www.chulavistaca.gov/privacytaskforce. • The City established a dedicated Task Force email to easily receive public comment and feedback from the public - privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov. • The City made a commitment to live stream and record all ten Task Force meetings for the public. All meeting recordings are available on the City website. • All Task Force meetings were open to the public and meeting agendas were posted at least 72 hours in advance. All members of the public were encouraged to provide in-person and electronic public comments at all meetings, totaling 36 hours. • The City hosted interactive community meetings on July 27 and July 28, 2022. These meetings were conducted at the South Chula Vista Branch Library and Otay Ranch Branch Library (total of 4 hours). • E-comment portal available for 72 hours before any task force meeting. • The City issued mulitple press releases to inform the public on the privacy task force and related initiatives. • Social media posts to over 58,000 Followers. • Articles and updates featured in monthly City newsletter (February-November) distributed to over 28,000 subscribers per month. • Outreach to a Task Force Subscriber list (75) and to all Board and Commission members (174). City Department Briefings and Onsite Tours: The Task Force received presentations from City staff and other experts on how the City is using technology, how other cities are using technology, existing laws regulating privacy and the use of technology and information security. City staff provided ten department briefings and two onsite tours on technologies and privacy protections within the respective service areas.  June 2 - Chula Vista Police Department headquarters. Task Force received presentations on the Drone as First Responder (DFR) program, Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) program, 911 Dispatch and the RTOC (Real-Time Operations Center).  June 23 - Traffic Engineering Department tour. Task Force received presentation on the Traffic Management Center.  June 23 – Task Force received demonstrations from the Information Technology Department and City Clerk.  June 27 and July 18 - Task Force received department briefings from Community Services, Library, Finance, Procurement, Fire, Human Resources, Development Services, and Housing departments and divisions. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 251 of 810 P a g e | 6 Public Opinion Survey Poll: The City engaged Competitive Edge Research & Communication (CERC), a San Diego-based public opinion research firm, in February 2022 to begin planning a scientific public opinion survey of Chula Vista residents. The survey was not used to develop the Policy but rather to provide City staff and Task Force members with a baseline understanding of resident opinions on privacy and specific technologies the City already uses. The survey gathered responses from a random sample of 607 Chula Vista residents, including registered voters and residents who are not registered to vote, from March 21 to March 30, 2022. Respondents were reached by telephone, text message, and email. Respondents were given the opportunity to answer survey questions in English, Spanish, or Tagalog. The results of the public opinion survey were presented to the Privacy Task Force at a public meeting on April 25, 2022. A complete report of the public opinion survey is attached under Attachment 5. Some key findings of the survey include the following :  Nearly 70 percent of residents say it is “extremely important” or “very important” that the City adopt a new privacy protection policy in an effort to make the City’s use of new technologies transparent and efficient.  Residents are significantly more confident in City efforts to keep their personal information safe and private compared to the federal government or online businesses such as Facebook and Amazon.  Nearly 72 percent of residents say they trust the Chula Vista Police Department “a lot” or “somewhat” when it comes to implementing policies in the best interest of the public. About 25 percent of residents say they trust the Police Department “not much” or “not at all.”  There is a high level of awareness of the drone program among residents, and nearly 79 percent of residents say they approve “strongly” or “somewhat” of the drone program.  Awareness of the Police Department’s use of automated license plate readers (ALPR) is lower than awareness of the drone program, and about 66 percent of residents say they approve “strongly” or “somewhat” of ALPR.  Trust in the Police Department is a strong predictor of how much a resident approves of the ALPR program. More than 77 percent of residents say they approve “strongly” or “somewhat” of the City’s use of traffic signal cameras to improve traffic flow and safety. Focus Groups: As a follow-up to the public opinion survey, the City engaged CERC to conduct a series of focus groups to provide a deeper understanding of resident concerns and preferences on privacy and City technology. CERC recruited residents from a random sample to participate in one of six focus groups held in June and July 2022. Four of the focus groups were conducted in English and two of the focus groups were conducted in Spanish. A total of 43 residents participated in these 90-minute sessions. The results of the focus groups were presented to the Privacy Task Force at a public meeting on August 1, 2022. A complete report on the focus groups is attached under Attachment 6. Notable findings are summarized here.  Housing affordability, crime and public safety, and homeless are the top issues for most residents.  Generally, residents’ noted their trust in the City to properly protect their privacy is because they have not heard any reports that the City has had a data breach or other problems with privacy.  Residents feel that they lack awareness of what the City is doing to protect their data.  Residents rated a series of potential policy ideas, with the most popular ideas being the following: 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 252 of 810 P a g e | 7 o Hiring a Chief Privacy Officer o Providing enhanced training to City staff o Establishing a privacy oversight board o Requiring more City Council oversight of privacy-related expenditures o Anonymizing data Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Policy Recommendations: In August 2022, the Task Force shared an initial draft of the policy recommendations and made them available to the public for comments and feedback. City staff coordinated with Madaffer Enterprises to provide all public comment and feedback to the task force before their final deliberation and adoption. In addition, at the Task Force’s request, City staff conducted a review of the draft recommendations and provided written comments. Attached to this staff report under Attachment 2 is the list of task force policy recommendations. On September 26,, 2022 the Task Force conducted its final meeting and adopted 37 policy recommendations for the City Manager to consider in the development of a citywide policy. Below is a brief summary of the Task Force policy recommendations: • Establish a Privacy Oversight Board • Hire a Chief Privacy Officer • Create written Use Polices to govern use of technology • Prohibit the sale of City data by third parties with certain exceptions • Enhance data retention, sharing and management controls, including anonimization of personal data, shortening of data retention periods where possible, approval of external data sharing with third parties • Provide Annual Technology Reports on the use of proposed or existing technologies • Provide enhanced privacy training for City staff • Institute additional City Council oversight of privacy-related contracts • Establish an Information Security Policy that addresses procedures for maintaining and controlling access to data, including roles and responsibilities of data stewards and custodians City of Chula Vista Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy: The City has developed a Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy (Policy) to serve as a guide for all City department privacy protection and data management processes, as well as the use of technology in City operations and services. The purpose of the Policy is summarized as follows:  To safeguard the security, accuracy, and control of access to City data and technology systems  To protect the civil rights and civil liberties of Chula Vista community members, including rights to privacy  To ensure that expert advice and community input is included as part of City decision-making involving the acquisition and use of privacy-impacting technology  To protect against the waste of taxpayer funds  To promote transparency in the acquisition and use of privacy-impacting technology by the City  To build and maintain public trust in the City and its use of technology to deliver public services 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 253 of 810 P a g e | 8 Sections of the Policy: City staff very much appreciates the work of the Task Force and found their input and recommendations very valuable in the development of this policy. The majority of the Task Force policy recommendations submitted to the City Manager on September 26, 2022 are incorporated into the proposed Policy in some manner. There are some policy recommendations that require further analysis before they can be incorporated into the Policy. The Policy contains the ten sections listed below:  Privacy and Technology Advisory Commission  Support from Privacy and Technology Experts  Use Policies  Surveillance Technology impact reports (STIR)  Surveillance Technology acquisition process  Transparency in the use of Sensitive and Surveillance Technology  Data Collection, Retention, Sharing and Management  Information security  Exceptions  Training, Compliance and Enforcement of the Policy and Compliance with Laws City staff worked with all City departments including the City Attorney to ensure that the policy recommendations included in the Policy were written in a way that ensures that the City adheres to all Federal, State and local laws and regulations regarding data privacy and proctection. As a result, some of the policy recommendations incorporated into the Policy required some modification in order to be fully applicable to the operations of the City of Chula Vista. Attached to this staff report under Attachment1 is the proposed Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy. Types of Technologies Used by the City The City of Chula Vista uses many technology systems to effectively deliver public services and will continue to responsibly explore new ways to use technology to better serve our communities, residents, and businesses. The following are the two types of technologies that the City of Chula Vista uses based on the type of data they generate or collect. These two categories are the basis for developing enhanced controls and oversight of the Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy: Sensitive Technology: Any electronic device, software program, or hosted software solution owned or operated by the City that generates or collects Sensitive Personal Information, but which is not designed or intended to be used for surveillance. For the purposes of this Policy, Sensitive Technology does not include the following:  Standard office technology such as email systems, copy machines, telephone networking systems, or broadly available consumer software such as Microsoft Office applications  IT infrastructure only intended to manage backend or operational data.  Technology solely intended to manage the Sensitive Personal Information of City employees, such as payroll, employment applications, health, and retirement benefits. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 254 of 810 P a g e | 9  Technology solely intended to manage the internal administrative functions of the City, such as case management systems and revenue collection and billing systems. Surveillance Technology: Any electronic device, software program, or hosted software solution that is designed or primarily intended to be used for the purpose of surveillance. For the purposes of the Policy, Surveillance Technology does not include the following:  Cameras installed on City property solely for the purpose of maintaining the security of that property.  Cameras installed solely to protect the physical integrity of City infrastructure, such as sewers and storm drains.  Technology that monitors only City employees in the performance of their City functions.  Body-worn cameras. Key Provisions in the Policy: Enhanced Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Oversight: The City will establish an advisory commission referred to herein as the Privacy and Technology Advisory Commission (PTAC), consisting of Chula Vista residents, responsible for carrying out a broad range of advisory duties, including reviewing and advising on City technology use policies, Surveillance Technology impact reports, annual reports, procurement standards for agreements involving Sensitive or Surveillance Technology, and facilitating public discussion of important issues related to privacy and City technology. Qualification requirements and criteria for PTAC candidates are also outlined in the policy. The City also will seek the advice of a privacy expert to serve as a liaison to the PTAC, help lead and coordinate privacy protection and technology transparency oversight initiatives. The roles of this position will include coordination with the PTAC for reporting and complaince review. Use policies for sensitive technology and surveillance technology: The City will establish a process for determining whether a particular technology is classified as surveillance technology or sensitive technology. Written use policies will be developed for all technologies that are classified under these two categories. Departments may rely on the City privacy advisor for assistance in developing use policies. The policy also requires that the City Departments review and update use policies any time there is a significant change in the function or purpose of the technology. Surveillance technology impact reports: The City shall require the creation of a surveillance technology impact report (STIR) for acquisition of surveillance technology. The STIR reports will include information on potential disproportionate impacts of the technology to certain communities or groups, financial impacts, impacts to city data systems and mitigation measures to these potential impacts. Surveillance technology acquisition process: The City shall require City Council approval and development of associated use policies and surveillance technology impact reports (STIR) for the acquisition of surveillance technology. The use policies and STIR reports will need to be presented to the PTAC for their recommendation as outlined in the Policy. In addition, respondents to City solicitations for new surveillance technology will be required to provide security reports and detail any associated risks. Transparency in the use of sensitive and surveillance technology: The City will provide a report at least every two years to the PTAC. The reports will describe the usage of surveillance technology within the City, detail related data sharing, usage and management and annual costs for the use of the technology. The reports also will detail any known impacts of the use of the technology and mitigation measures. In addition, the City also will provide a list of sensitive and surveillance technologies used by the City on the City website. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 255 of 810 P a g e | 10 Data Collection, Retention, Sharing & Management: The City will enhance internal controls on data collection, retention and management related to sensitive and surveilance technologies. In addition, the City shall restrict the unauthorized use and sale of sensitive personal information and data except for specific exceptions. City departments shall ensure that agreements prohibit vendors from using data owned by the City except as necessary to provide the contracted service to the City. Information Security: The City shall establish a cyber roadmap that protects Sensitive Personal Information from being exploited by unauthorized sources, including procedures for maintaining and controlling access to sensitive city data and technology systems. Exceptions: The Policy outlines specific circumstances where limited exceptions to the Policy would apply. The City Manager or City Council as appropriate may waive elements of the policy in the event of exigent circumstances or other circumstances that make compliance impossible or infeasible. Training, Compliance and Enforcement of the Policy and Compliance with Laws: The Policy outlines that the City Manager will be responsible for interpretation and oversight of City compliance with the Policy, this includes relevant City staff training. The Policy also specifies that all provisions must comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws governing the collection, storage and disclosure of Sensitive Personal Information, and protection of individual civil rights and liberties. Considerations for Policy implementation: Formation of a Technology Governance Committee: Once the Policy is adopted, and as part of the implementation, a key consideration will be the formation of a Technology Governance Committee (TGC). The role of the TGC will be to review and approve new technology that the City wants to acquire. The TGC will report to the Director of Information Technology (IT) under the direction of the City Manager. The TGC will consist of representatives from multiple departments including the Police Department, IT, Finance, and Engineering. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT N/A ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT It is anticipated that administering and implementing this Policy will have significant budgetary impacts. One such position that has currently been identified is the addition of one Records Manager which will be added to the City Clerk personnel budget as part of the City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2024 Proposed Budget. The fiscal impact of a Records Manager will be $122,314. In addition, City staff will return to seek City Council approval of a privacy expert consultant or advisor as contemplated in the Policy. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 256 of 810 P a g e | 11 ATTACHMENTS 1. Privacy Protection & Technology Transparency Policy 2. Privacy Advisory Taskforce Policy Recommendations 3. Privacy Advisory Taskforce Supplementary Documents for Policy Recommendations 4. Privacy Advisory Taskforce Meetings Public Comments 5. Public Opinion Survey Report 6. Focus groups Report Staff Contact: Dennis Gakunga, Chief Sustainability Officer, Economic Development Department Anne Steinberger, Marketing and Communications Manager, City Manager’s Office Adrianna Hernandez, Special Projects Manager, City Manager’s Office 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 257 of 810 RESOLUTION NO. ________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING A COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING PRIVACY PROTECTION AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSPARENCY WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista adopted a Smart City Strategic Action Plan “Action Plan” in September 2017 establishing itself as a leader in the growing “smart city” movement, earning recognition locally, nationally and internationally for its innovative planned approach to using technology to create a more efficient and effective government; and WHEREAS the City of Chula Vista continues to leverage innovative technology and data tools to better serve and engage citizens, enhance sustainability, improve public safety, and promote local economic development; and WHEREAS, a key goal of the Action Plan approved by Council in September 2017, is to continue efforts to become a more open and transparent City; and WHEREAS, to support this goal, the City has set an objective to maximize the use of data and analytics to improve services and increase public access to City information; and WHEREAS, this effort involves ensuring that citywide technology, sensitive public data, and information collected is managed and utilized in a secure, transparent, and safe way; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved an agreement with Madaffer Enterprises to provide consulting services to the City of Chula Vista for the development of a citywide privacy protection and technology transparency policy because of their history working with the City of Chula Vista on the development of the 2017 Smart Cities Strategic Action Plan, and related technology implementation efforts; and WHEREAS, in April 2022, the Chula Vista City Manager formed a 12-member Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force “Task Force” to provide the City Manager policy recommendations for consideration in the development of a citywide policy on technology and privacy issues; and WHEREAS, over the course of six months, the Task Force held ten public meetings, received two on-site departmental tours, and held two community meetings resulting in 37 policy recommendations; and WHEREAS, based on their input, and input from key City staff and Madaffer Enterprises, a Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy “Policy” was developed; and 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 258 of 810 Resolution No. 2021- Page 2 WHEREAS, as drafted, the Policy will help to advance the City Council priorities of improving sensitive public data management, security, and privacy; and WHEREAS the anticipated benefits from the Policy include enhancement of City operations through a more reliable, secure, and safe city network and data management process, increased oversight of citywide technology systems, and improved accountability, transparency and increased public trust. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it approves the City Council Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy, in the form presented, with such minor modifications as may be required or approved by the City Attorney, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of t he City of Chula Vista, that it authorizes and directs the City Manager to take such actions that are necessary and appropriate to implement the objectives of the Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy in accordance with its terms. Presented by Approved as to form by Maria V. Kachadoorian Glen R. Googins City Manager City Attorney 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 259 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 260 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 261 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 262 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 263 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 264 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 265 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 266 of 810 Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 267 of 810 Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force Final Summary of Policy Recommendations Guiding Principles Guiding Principle 1: Protecting the privacy and safety of Chula Vista residents via enforceable law. • The task force intends that ordinances should be passed by the Chula Vista City Council to regulate the acquisition, deployment, use and expansion of new or existing technology designed to or capable of monitoring or capturing personal identifying information (sensitive or surveillance) by the City of Chula Vista. • The task force urges the Chula Vista City Council to align all future decisions regarding technology designed to or capable of monitoring or capturing personal identifying information (sensitive or surveillance) with the principles of ensuring Chula Vista residents receive maximum awareness, that any such technologies provide defined and verifiable benefits for Chula Vista residents. • The task force intends that the fully advised and informed elected members of Chula Vista City Council should be the only body that can authorize new acquisition of, or continuing use of, technology designed to or capable of monitoring or capturing personal identifying information (sensitive or surveillance). There should be no automatic exemption from this approval process for technologies currently in use. Guiding Principle 2: Providing the communities of Chula Vista with a permanent, empowered board or commission. • The task force intends that a board or commission of independent community members that are affected by technology and or who are most knowledgeable of the risks of surveillance technology, will be created by Chula Vista City Council. • The task force intends that the board/commission should be empowered by Chula Vista City Council to ensure the community is fully informed and provided with sufficient time and opportunities for meaningful engagement. • The task force believes local communities and their elected officials should be empowered to make determinations about the use of existing and new technology. We do not intend for department heads or department staff to be empowered to make these determinations without transparency and oversight. • It is the communities most affected that are most in need of an empowered platform, and whose advice can be most meaningful to creating a trusted process. The task force intends that the City select its board/commission members accordingly. Guiding Principle 3: Protecting taxpayer funds and City operations from waste, fraud and abuse. • The task force intends that the proposed acquisition and/or use of technology only be consented to by the Chula Vista City Council under defined conditions, which are enforced by City Council during the approval process. • The task force intends that city departments seeking to fund, acquire, and/or use a surveillance technology should provide information on the surveillance technology’s financial benefits and costs, including its acquisition and annual operational costs. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 268 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 2 • The task force intends that any program designed to or capable of monitoring or capturing personal identifying information (sensitive or surveillance) being considered for approval should demonstrate written policies and operational controls that are commensurate with the impacts and risks of harms that will be placed on the communities of Chula Vista. • Any eligible technology operated by the City should be periodically required to demonstrate to the community and City Council the technology’s costs and effectiveness at achieving its intended purpose, and its compliance with all privacy requirements. Guiding Principle 4: Protecting Chula Vista residents’ civil rights and civil liberties • The task force intends that technologies designed to or capable of monitoring or capturing personal identifying information (sensitive or surveillance) should not be funded, acquired, or used without studying and addressing their potential impact on civil rights and civil liberties. • The task force intends that city departments seeking to fund, acquire, or use a technology designed to or capable of monitoring or capturing personal identifying information (sensitive or surveillance) should expressly identify the potential adverse impacts the technology may have on civil rights and civil liberties and what specific measures it will undertake to prevent such adverse impacts. This information should serve as the basis for all public hearings regarding the proposed technology. Based on the guiding principles outlined above, the task force has developed the following specific recommendations. Introductory Statements: 1. The Task Force urges the City to adopt ordinances to provide greater structure and accountability to these recommendations. 2. While the Task Force understands it is the City’s prerogative to accept only some of the recommendations in this document, the Task Force urges the City to treat these recommendations as a unified whole and implement all recommendations. 3. The Task Force has received multiple public comments regarding the methodology used to conduct the public opinion survey and focus groups. The Task Force encourages City staff and City Councilmembers to consider the potential for bias in the results of the public opinion research, particularly as described in the letter from Dr. Norah Shultz of San Diego State University, which was provided as part of the August 15 Task Force meeting agenda. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 269 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 3 Privacy Advisory Board 1. The City should establish a permanent Privacy Advisory Board responsible for carrying out a broad range of advisory duties. a. The Privacy Advisory Board should be established as soon as possible, as it is key to implementing many of the recommendations in this document and conducting further public discussion on important issues related to privacy and City technology. b. The Board’s duties are described throughout this document, including: i. Holding regular meetings that are open to the public, including opportunities for public comment in English and other languages. ii. Reviewing Use Policies for technologies that generate Sensitive Personal Information and making recommendations on changes iii. Reviewing Technology Impact Reports for technologies that generate Sensitive Personal Information and making recommendations on changes iv. Reviewing Annual Impact Reports for technologies that generate Sensitive Personal Information and making recommendations on changes v. Reviewing data sharing agreements. vi. Reviewing new and existing technology-related contracts. 2. The Privacy Advisory Board should have nine members, at least two-thirds of whom are Chula Vista residents. a. Chula Vista residents should comprise a super-majority of Board members because residents experience the impacts of City decisions on privacy and technology to a much greater degree than non-residents do. b. The purpose of allowing non-residents to serve on the Board is to recognize that non-residents also experience the impacts of City decisions on privacy and technology, especially if they work, own a business, or attend school in Chula Vista. Additionally, non-residents may have valuable expertise or perspectives that should be included on the Board. c. There is no requirement to include non-residents on the Board. 3. Privacy Advisory Board members will be selected through a combination of City staff review, community review, and City Council review. a. Members of the Board should be selected through a process that includes review and vetting by both City staff and by community leaders, similar to the process used to appoint members of the Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force. b. All members of the Board must be approved by a majority vote of the City Council pursuant to the City Charter. c. The purpose of involving community leaders in the selection process for some members is to ensure that Board membership is not exclusively determined by City staff or elected officials. 4. Selections to the Board should reflect the City’s diversity in terms of race, gender, and age. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 270 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 4 All Board members shall be persons who have an interest in privacy rights as demonstrated by work experience, civic participation, and/or political advocacy. No member may be an elected official. No member may have a financial interest, employment, or policy-making position in any commercial or for-profit facility, research center, or other organization that sells surveillance equipment or profits from decisions made by the Board. Each of the following perspectives should be represented by at least one member of the Board: a. A resident of Council District 1 b. A resident of Council District 2 c. A resident of Council District 3 d. A resident of Council District 4 e. A technology professional with expertise in emerging technologies and systems (this perspective should be represented by three members of the board) f. A professional financial auditor or Certified Public Accountant (CPA) g. An attorney, legal scholar, or recognized academic with expertise in privacy and/or civil rights h. A member of an organization that focuses on government transparency or individual privacy i. A representative from an equity-based organization or a member of the Human Relations Commission. j. A former member of the Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force (only applies to the first year of appointments) Chief Privacy Officer 5. The City should hire a full-time Chief Privacy Officer responsible for carrying out a broad range of duties related to privacy. a. Until a full-time Chief Privacy Officer can be budgeted and hired, the duties of the Chief Privacy Officer should be carried out by the Chief Information Security Officer. b. The Chief Privacy Officer should report to the City Manager to ensure they are accountable to City Council and the voters of Chula Vista. i. A minority of task force members believes the Chief Privacy Officer should report to the City Attorney to ensure they are accountable to the voters of Chula Vista. c. The Chief Privacy Officer’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to: i. Provide regular training sessions and guidance to City staff on privacy issues. ii. Serve as the primary City staff liaison to the Privacy Advisory Board, including: 1. Managing agendas and coordinating meetings 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 271 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 5 2. Managing the selection process for Privacy Advisory Board members 3. Assisting in the preparation and presentation of technology Use Policies for Board review iii. Performing internal audits and ensuring compliance with data retention standards and use policies, and coordinating with external privacy auditors when applicable iv. Evaluating new technology acquisitions for potential privacy issues Use Policies 6. The City should create written Use Policies that govern the use of each technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information and the data generated by those technologies. a. Each policy should clearly state the purpose of the technology, who will be allowed to access the technology, how the technology can be used, what kind of data the technology generates, how that data can be used, how that data is protected, and the retention period for that data. 7. Use Policies should be drafted by the applicable department in consultation with the Chief Privacy Officer, then reviewed by the Privacy Advisory Board. a. Departments will use a template created by the Chief Privacy Officer. 8. Use Policies should be reviewed annually and updated if necessary. Use policies should also be reviewed and updated any time there is a significant change in the function or purpose of the technology. 9. Due to the large number of use policies that may need to be created or updated, the Chief Privacy Officer and Privacy Advisory Board will perform an analysis that prioritizes current and future technologies based on the impact and risks to individual privacy. Based on the results of this analysis, use policies will be reviewed for the highest-ranked technologies first. a. Facial recognition technology, other biometric systems, surveillance systems, and systems that use machine learning algorithms should be a top priority for Board review. Data Retention and Data Sharing 10. The City should never sell the data it collects nor allow third parties working on behalf of the City to sell or use data owned by the City except as necessary to provide the contracted service to the City. 11. Sharing of Sensitive Personal Information between City Departments should be subject to a review process that includes approval by the City Manager and periodic review by the Chief Privacy Officer and Privacy Advisory Board. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 272 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 6 a. The purpose of this policy recommendation is to ensure there is a clear understanding of how data is being used and shared between departments, and to prevent situations where there is uncertainty around how data is being used, such as in the case of the informal data-sharing that occurred between Engineering and the Police Department regarding traffic signal camera feeds. b. This recommendation does not apply to the sharing of standard business data or other operational information between departments. It does apply to data that can be used to identify a person. 12. External data-sharing between the City and third parties must be approved through a formal, auditable process that includes the Chief Privacy Officer and Privacy Advisory Board. a. The purpose of this policy recommendation is to prevent situations like the sharing of ALPR data with law enforcement agencies that should not have had access to it. b. The review should ensure that personal information is not being shared and that the data has been repackaged and de-identified to minimize the possibility of privacy violations. 13. The City Records Retention Schedule should be re-organized and expanded to include information on what personal data is collected and when that data will be deleted. a. As part of these updates, the Records Retention schedule should be presented in a format that provides a category for data type in addition to the existing categories. b. The Chief Privacy Officer should collaborate with the City Clerk to lead this process. 14. The City should establish a more formal process for ensuring that personal data is being deleted according to the Use Policies established for that data. 15. The City should establish a policy that it will not collect personal data unless it is absolutely necessary to provide the core service. a. The Chula Vista Public Library’s approach to personal data is a model that should be followed citywide. Personal data is only collected and retained for the period necessary to provide the service. For example, the library keeps a record of an item checked out by an individual borrower only until that item is returned, at which point data related to that transaction is deleted. b. To ensure compliance with this policy, the Chief Privacy Officer should randomly sample Departments or data sets to review on a periodic basis. 16. Where possible, the City should anonymize, remove, or de-identify data that relates to a person. a. It must be understood and acknowledged that anonymization strategies will not completely protect individuals from having their identities reverse-engineered from otherwise anonymized datasets, but these strategies are still valuable in mitigating risks to individual privacy. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 273 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 7 17. The role of the City’s Data Governance Committee should be more clearly defined and communicated to the public. a. The City should ensure that the work of the Data Governance Committee is consistent with the City’s adopted privacy policies and with the role or recommendations of the Privacy Advisory Board. Transparency and Oversight 18. City staff should provide Annual Technology Reports (as defined) to the Privacy Advisory Board on the use of proposed or existing technologies that generate Sensitive Personal Information. a. Any other reports currently provided on a more frequent basis (such as Automated License Plate Reader systems) should continue to be provided on the same basis. 19. City staff should provide the public with full disclosures about what technologies have been acquired, what data is being collected, and how that data is being used. a. These disclosures should happen in a variety of ways, including on the City’s website, through email newsletters, social media, and in printed communications mailed to residents. b. These disclosures should address what data is being collected, what department is collecting it, how it is being used, who has access to it, how long it is retained, etc. c. Where feasible, signs should be posted to notify and disclose surveillance technology. For example, if surveillance cameras are added to parks, signs should be posted notifying visitors that they are under video surveillance. d. The City should hold public forums, educational seminars, and other types of community events to ensure the public is informed and has an opportunity to hold the City accountable for how technologies that generate Sensitive Personal Information are being used. e. All public disclosures related to technology, data, and privacy should be provided with adequate time for public review before any meeting. The 72-hour standard is not sufficient for the public to review and consider new information, especially when that time period coincides with weekends and holidays. 20. Information about privacy and technology that is provided on the City website should be easy to find and easy to understand. a. Links to disclosures should be provided on each Department’s page within the City website. b. The City’s “smart city” webpages should have their own navigational tab or section on the City website, rather than being contained under the Business / Economic Development section. 21. Contracts with technology vendors should be easy for the public to find and review. a. This should include information about the status of existing contracts, including upcoming renewal or termination dates. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 274 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 8 22. Data breaches should be disclosed to affected individuals as soon as possible, pursuant to all applicable state and federal laws, and the City should provide a general notification to the public once the issue has been fully resolved. a. Notification to the general public should occur through a wide range of communications channels, including social media, news media, and the City website. To protect the City’s information security, only limited information should be released to the general public. 23. Residents should have the opportunity to opt-out or have their data deleted if it was provided voluntarily to the City and is not needed for City operations. a. It is understood that individuals will not be able to opt-out of certain types of data collection, such as a drone responding to 9-1-1 calls, or medical data being retained following a emergency medical service call. 24. The City should establish strong whistleblower protections for any employee who reports a suspected violation of the City’s privacy or technology policies or any use of City technology that could violate an individual’s privacy. Procurement 25. All contracts with privacy risks must be presented to the City Council, regardless of whether they meet standard purchasing and contracting thresholds that typically trigger City Council review. 26. At least one month prior to a City Council decision to acquire new technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information or to adopt new policies around the use of new or existing technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information, the City should hold public meetings to solicit community input on the proposed policies associated with the technology. a. Meetings should be held in locations on both the West and East sides in locations such as public libraries. b. These public meetings should include a presentation by City staff outlining how the technology would work, types of data to be collected, how the data would be protected, etc. c. These meetings should be recorded and made available on the City’s website and/or social media channels such as YouTube, and links to the video should be promoted through City communications channels in the weeks prior to a City Council decision. 27. Following the public meetings and prior to seeking City Council approval for a new technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information, City staff should create a Technology Impact Report as defined. a. Any change in the proposed use of a technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information requires a new Technology Impact Report. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 275 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 9 28. Prior to City Council presentation, contracts with privacy risks must be reviewed by the Chief Privacy Officer and the Privacy Advisory Board. The evaluation provided by the Chief Privacy Officer and the Privacy Advisory Board must be included as part of the report presented to City Council. 29. Public disclosures should follow a process similar to the one outlined in Appendix C, in which City staff first hosts community meetings at least one month prior to a City Council meeting, then provides draft Technology Impact Reports and Use Policies to the Privacy Advisory Board, then receives feedback and a recommendation from the Privacy Advisory Board, then provides public notice at least two weeks in advance of a City Council meeting, and then holds a public hearing at a City Council meeting. 30. As a strategy to mitigate risks to the City’s information security, the City should establish a preference for acquiring technology that is developed and sold by companies that are owned and based in the United States. 31. Prior to agreeing to acquire new technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information, the City Council should make a determination that the following conditions have been met: a. The collection and use of Sensitive Personal Information is reasonably necessary and proportionate for one of the following purposes, and that this purpose outweighs the risks and costs to the civil rights and civil liberties of Chula Vista community members: i. The vital interest of the individual ii. The public interest iii. Contractual necessity iv. Compliance with legal obligations v. Unambiguous consent of the individual vi. Legitimate interest of the City b. City staff have provided an adequate justification for the stated purposes, retention periods, and impacts of the technology. c. The public has been notified at least 30 days prior to the City Council decision. d. The Privacy Advisory Board has reviewed and provided a recommendation as part of the City’s due diligence and risk assessment process, and this recommendation has been documented and considered by the City Council. e. The City will follow best practices — including, but not limited to, anonymization, encryption, and least privilege access — to safeguard data. f. The City will govern the use of surveillance data and biometric data in a manner similar to the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) requirements for “sensitive data.” 32. The City may not enter into any agreement that prohibits the City from publicly acknowledging that it has acquired or is using a particular technology. Nondisclosure agreements are acceptable only to extent that they protect a vendor’s proprietary information without prohibiting the City’s acknowledgement of a relationship with the 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 276 of 810 Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: Final Summary of Policy Recommendations 10 vendor. 33. Contracts should include a clause of convenience that allows the City to terminate the agreement in the event the vendor violates any restriction on the sale or sharing of data or otherwise violates individual privacy protections. 34. Technology contracts should require that vendors provide the City with the capability to audit or review who has accessed what information. a. These access reports should be provided at pre-designated intervals to City staff or third-party auditors. 35. City staff should be provided with additional training to assist in recognizing potential data privacy issues in contracts. a. Key staff to receive additional training includes the Chief Privacy Officer, Chief Information Security Officer, City Attorney staff, and purchasing and contracting staff. 36. Changes in the ownership of a technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information that has already been reviewed by the Privacy Advisory Board should trigger a new review by the Privacy Advisory Board. Information Security 37. Establish a comprehensive information security policy that addresses procedures for maintaining and controlling access to data and articulates the roles and responsibilities of data stewards and data custodians. a. An outline of such a policy has been developed by the Information Security subcommittee of this Task Force and will be submitted as part of this recommendation. b. The policy should make clear that only City-owned mobile equipment using two- factor authentication should be allowed to connect to the City’s primary network. Any personal devices connecting to the City’s network must use restricted “guest” access. c. The policy should provide for audits of all City-owned equipment to protect against unauthorized storage of regulated data. d. The policy should require data security breaches to be reviewed and addressed by an established panel that includes the Director of Information Technology Services, the Chief Information Security Officer, the Chief of Police, the City Attorney, and the Chief Privacy Officer. e. The policy should require that data is stored and transmitted in encrypted formats whenever possible and prohibit the communication of confidential data through end-user messaging technologies such as email, instant messaging, chat, or other communication methods. f. The policy should specifically address mobile computing devices, including recovery of data in the event a mobile computing device is lost or stolen. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 277 of 810 Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force Supplementary Documents for Policy Recommendations 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 278 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 279 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 2 Definitions 1.“Annual Technology Report” means a written report concerning a specific technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information that includes all the following: (Source: San Diego TRUST pg.3) a. A description of how the technology was used, including the type and quantity of data gathered or analyzed by the technology; b. Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the technology was shared with internal or external entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed, under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the disclosure(s) except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; c. Where applicable, a description of the physical objects to which the technology hardware was installed without revealing the specific location of such hardware; for technology software, a breakdown of what data sources the technology was applied to; d. Where applicable, a description of where the technology was deployed geographically, by each Police Area in the relevant year; e. A summary of community complaints or concerns about the technology, and an analysis of its Use Policy and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and civil liberties. The analysis shall consider whether, and to what extent, the use of the technology disproportionately impacts certain groups or individuals; f. The results of any internal audits or investigations relating to technology, any information about violations or potential violations of the Use Policy, and any actions taken in response. To the extent that the public release of such information is prohibited by law, City staff shall provide a confidential report to the City Council regarding this information to the extent allowed by law; g. Information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; h. A general description of all methodologies used to detect incidents of data breaches or unauthorized access, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 280 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 3 I. Information, including crime statistics, that helps the community assess whether the technology has been effective at achieving its identified purposes; i. Statistics and information about Public Records Act requests regarding the relevant subject technology, including response rates, such as the number of Public Records Act requests on such technology and the open and close date for each of these Public Records Act requests; j. Total annual costs for the technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs, and what source of funding will fund the technology in the coming year; and k. Any requested modifications to the Use Policy and a detailed basis for the request. 2. “City” means any department, unit, program, and/or subordinate division of the City of Chula Vista as provided by Chapter XXXX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. (Source: CV Municipal Code Sec. 210.01.01 paragraph C; San Diego TRUST pg.6) 3. “City staff” means City personnel authorized by the City Manager or appropriate City department head to seek City Council Approval of Technology That Generates Sensitive Personal Information in conformance with this Chapter. (Source: San Diego TRUST pg.7) 4. “Community meeting” means a publicly held meeting that is accessible, noticed at least seventy-two hours in advance in at least two languages, for the purpose of educating communities, answering questions, and learning about potential impacts of the technology on disadvantaged groups. (Source: CV City Charter pg.7; San Diego TRUST pg.7) 5. “Continuing agreement” means a written agreement that automatically renews unless terminated by one or more parties. (Source: CV City Charter pg.7; San Diego TRUST pg.7) 6. “Exigent circumstances” means a City department’s good faith belief that an emergency involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any individual requires the use of a technology that generates Sensitive Personal Information that has not received prior approval by City Council. (Source: CV City Charter pg.7; San Diego TRUST pg.7) 7. “Facial recognition technology” means an automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual based on an individual’s face. (Source: CV City Charter pg.7; San Diego TRUST pg.7) 8. “Individual” means a natural person. (Source: CV City Charter pg.7; San Diego TRUST pg.7) 9. “Personal communication device” means a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant, a wireless capable tablet and a similar wireless two-way communications and/or portable internet- accessing device, whether procured or subsidized by a City entity or personally owned, that is used in the regular course of City business. (Source: CV City Charter pg.8; San Diego TRUST pg.8) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 281 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 4 10. “Police area” refers to each of the geographic districts assigned to a Chula Vista Police Department captain or commander and as such districts are amended from time to time. (Source: CV City Charter pg.8; San Diego TRUST pg.8) 11. “Privacy Impact Assessment” means an analysis of how information is handled to ensure handling conforms to applicable legal, regulatory, and policy requirements regarding privacy; to determine the risks and effects of creating, collecting, using, processing, storing, maintaining, disseminating, disclosing, and disposing of information in identifiable form in an electronic information system; and to examine and evaluate protections and alternate processes for handling information to mitigate potential privacy concerns. A privacy impact assessment is both an analysis and a formal document detailing the process and the outcome of the analysis (Source: National Institute of Standards and Technology Computer Security Resource Center) 12. “Privacy Risk” means the likelihood that individuals will experience problems resulting from data processing, and the impact should they occur. (Source: National Institute of Standards and Technology Computer Security Resource Center) 13. “Sensitive personal information” will reflect the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) (Source: 1798.140) definition of personal information which defines the term to include: (l) personal information that reveals: (A) a consumer’s social security, driver’s license, state identification card, or passport number; (B) a consumer’s account log-in, financial account, debit card, or credit card number in combination with any required security or access code, password, or credentials allowing access to an account; (C) a consumer’s precise geolocation; (D) a consumer’s racial or ethnic origin, religious or philosophical beliefs, or union membership; (E) the contents of a consumer’s mail, email and text messages, unless the business is the intended recipient of the communication; (F) a consumer’s genetic data; and (2) (A) the processing of biometric information for the purpose of uniquely identifying a consumer; (B) personal information collected and analyzed concerning a consumer’s health; or (C) personal information collected and analyzed concerning a consumer’s sex life or sexual orientation. 14. “Surveillance” (or “spying”) means to observe or analyze the movements, behavior, data, or actions of individuals. Individuals include those whose identity can be revealed by data or combinations of data, such as license plate data, images, IP addresses, user identifications, unique digital identifiers, or data traces left by the individual. (Source: CV City Charter pg.8) 15. “Surveillance technology” means any software (e.g., scripts, code, Application Programming Interfaces), electronic device, or system utilizing an electronic device used, designed, or primarily intended to observe, collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 282 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 5 location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group. It also includes the product (e.g., audiovisual recording, data, analysis, report) of such surveillance technology. Examples of surveillance technology include, but are not limited to the following: cell site simulators (Stingrays); automated license plate readers; gunshot detectors (ShotSpotter); drone-mounted data collection; facial recognition software; thermal imaging systems; body-worn cameras; social media analytics software; gait analysis software; video cameras that can record audio or video and transmit or be remotely accessed. It also includes software designed to monitor social media services or forecast and/or predict criminal activity or criminality, and biometric identification hardware or software. “Surveillance technology” does not include devices, software, or hardware, unless they have been equipped with, or are modified to become or include, a surveillance technology beyond what is set forth below or used beyond a purpose as set forth below: (Source: CV City Charter pg.8; San Diego TRUST pg.8) a. Routine office hardware, such as televisions, computers, credit card machines, badge readers, copy machines, and printers, that is in widespread use and will not be used for any public surveillance or law enforcement functions related to the public; b. Parking Ticket Devices (PTDs) used solely for parking enforcement-related purposes, including any sensors embedded in parking sensors to detect the presence of a car in the space; c. Manually-operated, non-wearable, handheld digital cameras, audio recorders, and video recorders that are not designed to be used surreptitiously and whose functionality is limited to manually-capturing and manually-downloading video and/or audio recordings; d. Surveillance devices that cannot record or transmit audio or video or be remotely accessed, such as image stabilizing binoculars or night vision goggles; e. Manually-operated technological devices used primarily for internal municipal entity communications and are not designed to surreptitiously collect surveillance data, such as radios and email systems; f. City databases that do not contain any data or other information collected, captured, recorded, retained, processed, intercepted, or analyzed by surveillance technology, including payroll, accounting, or other fiscal databases; g. Medical equipment used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease or injury, provided that any information obtained from this equipment is used solely for medical purposes; h. Police department interview room cameras; i. City department case management systems; 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 283 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 6 j. Personal Communication Devices that have not been modified beyond stock manufacturer capabilities in a manner described above; k. Surveillance technology used by the City solely to monitor and conduct internal investigations involving City employees, contractors, and volunteers; and, l. Systems, software, databases, and data sources used for revenue collection on behalf of the City by the City Treasurer, provided that no information from these sources is shared by the City Treasurer with any other City department or third-party except as part of efforts to collect revenue that is owed to the City. 16. “Technology Impact Report” means a publicly-posted written report for each Technology that Generates Sensitive Personal Information including, at a minimum, the following: (Source: CV Charter pg.11; San Diego TRUST pg.11) a. Description: Information describing the technology and how it works, including product descriptions from manufacturers; b. Purpose: Information on the proposed purposes(s) for the technology; c. Location: The physical or virtual location(s) it may be deployed, using general descriptive terms, and crime statistics for any location(s); d. Impact: An assessment of the Use Policy for the particular technology and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and liberties and whether the technology was used or deployed, intentionally or inadvertently, in a manner that may disproportionately affect marginalized communities; e. Mitigations: Identify specific, affirmative technical and procedural measures that will be implemented to safeguard the public from each identified impact; f. Data Types and Sources: A list of all types and sources of data to be collected, analyzed, or processed by the technology, including open source data, scores, reports, logic or algorithm used, and any additional information derived therefrom; g. Data Security: Information about the controls that will be designed and implemented to ensure that adequate security objectives are achieved to safeguard the data collected or generated by the technology from unauthorized access or disclosure; h. Fiscal Costs and Sources: The forecasted, prior, and ongoing fiscal costs for the technology, including initial purchase, personnel, and other ongoing costs, and any past, current or potential sources of funding; i. Third-Party Dependence: Whether use or maintenance of the technology will require data gathered by the technology to be handled or stored by a third-party vendor at any time; 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 284 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 7 j. Alternatives: A summary of all alternative methods (whether involving the use of a new technology or not) considered before deciding to use the proposed technology, including the costs and benefits associated with each alternative and an explanation of the reasons why each alternative is inadequate; k. Track Record: A summary of the experience (if any) other entities, especially government entities, have had with the proposed technology, including, if available, quantitative information about the effectiveness of the proposed technology in achieving its stated purpose in other jurisdictions, and any known adverse information about the technology such as unanticipated costs, failures, or civil rights and civil liberties abuses, existing publicly reported controversies, and any court rulings in favor or in opposition to thetechnology; and l. Public engagement and comments: A description of any community engagement held and any future community engagement plans, number of attendees, a compilation of all comments received and City departmental responses given, and City departmental conclusions about potential neighborhood impacts and how such impacts may differ as it pertains to different segments of the community that may result from the acquisition of the technology. 17. “Technology that generates ‘Sensitive Personal Information’” includes “Surveillance technology” and other technology that presents “Privacy Risks” 18. “Use Policy” means a publicly-released and legally-enforceable policy for use of a Technology that Generates Sensitive Personal Information that at a minimum specifies the following: (Source: CV Charter pg.13; San Diego TRUST pg.13) a. Purpose: The specific purpose(s) that the technology is intended to advance; b. Use: The specific uses that are authorized, and the rules and processes required prior to such use; c. Data Collection: The information that can be collected, captured, recorded, intercepted, or retained by the technology, as well as data that might be inadvertently collected during the authorized uses of the technology and what measures will be taken to minimize and delete such data. Where applicable, any data sources the technology will rely upon, including open source data, should be listed; d. Data Access: The job classification of individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the rules and processes required prior to access or use of the information; e. Data Protection: The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access, including logging, encryption, and access control mechanisms; 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 285 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions 8 f. Data Retention: The time period, if any, for which information collected by the technology will be routinely retained, the reason such retention period is appropriate to further the purpose(s), the process by which the information is regularly deleted after that period lapses, and the specific conditions that must be met to retain information beyond that period; g. Public Access: A description of how collected information can be accessed or used by members of the public, including criminal defendants; h. Third Party Data Sharing: If and how information obtained from the technology can be used or accessed, including any required justification or legal standard necessary to do so and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information; i. Training: The training required for any individual authorized to use the technology or to access information collected by the technology; j. Auditing and Oversight: The procedures used to ensure that the Use Policy is followed, including internal personnel assigned to ensure compliance with the policy, internal recordkeeping of the use of the technology or access to information collected by the technology, technical measures to monitor for misuse, any independent person or entity with oversight authority, and the legally enforceable sanctions for violations of the policy; and k. Maintenance: The procedures used to ensure that the security and integrity of the technology and collected information will be maintained. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 286 of 810 Appendix B: Information Security Policy Note: The task force is attaching the following information security policy model, drafted by task force member Charles Walker, as a sample resource to assist City staff in developing a comprehensive information security policy. This policy model is an incomplete working draft and has not been fully vetted by the task force. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 287 of 810 2 Recommended City Information Security Policies PURPOSE: To provide guidelines with regard to the responsibility of every City of Chula Vista (City) employee who accesses Data and information in electronic formats and to provide for the security of that Data and to restrict unauthorized access to such information. POLICY: Electronic Data is important to the City assets that must be protected by appropriate safeguards and managed with respect to Data stewardship. This policy defines the required Electronic Data ma nagement environment and classifications of Data, and assigns responsibility for ensuring Data and information privacy and security at each level of access and control. SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY: This policy applies to all City personnel and affiliated users with access to City Data. DEFINITIONS: Affiliated Users: Vendors and guests who have a relationship to the City and need access to City systems. Application or App: A software program run on a computer or mobile device for the purpose of providing a business/academic/social function. Cloud: An on-demand availability, geographically dispersed infrastructure of computer system resources, especially data storage (cloud storage) and computing power, without direct active management by the end user. Clouds may be limited to a single organization (Private Cloud), or be available to many organizations (Public Cloud). Cloud-computing providers offer their “services” according to three standard models: Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS). Confidential Data: Data that are specifically restricted from open disclosure to the public by law are classified as Confidential Data. Confidential Data requires a high level of protection against unau thorized disclosure, modification, transmission, destruction, and use. Confidential Data include, but are not limited to: • Medical Data, such as Electronic Protected Health Information and Data protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA); • Investigation. Only investigation data and information within the following broad categories is to be considered Confidential Data: o Active Investigations; o Activity that is covered by a fully executed non-disclosure agreement (NDA); o Information, data, etc., that is proprietary or confidential (whether it belongs to an internal investigator or an outside collaborator), regardless of whether it is subject to an NDA; o Information or data that is required to be deemed confidential by state or federal law (e.g., personally identifying information about research subjects, HIPAA or FERPA protected information, etc.); and o Information related to an allegation or investigation into misconduct. • Information access security, such as login passwords, Personal Identification Numbers (PINS), logs with personally identifiable Data, digitized signatures, and encryption keys; Appendix B: Information Security Policy Model 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 288 of 810 3 • Primary account numbers, cardholder Data, credit card numbers, payment card information, banking information, employer or taxpayer identification number, demand deposit account number, savings account number, financial transaction device account number, account password , stock or other security certificate or account number (such as Data protected by the Payment Card Indu stry Data Security Standard) ; • Personnel file, including Social Security Numbers; • Library records; • Driver’s license numbers, state personal identification card numbers, Social Security Numbers, employee identification numbers, government passport numbers, and other personal information that is protected from disclosure by state and federal identity theft laws and regulations. Data Classifications: All Electronic Data covered by this policy are assigned one of three classifications: • Confidential • Operation Critical • Unrestricted Data Custodian: Persons or departments providing operational support for an information system and having responsibility for implementing the Data Maintenance and Control Method defined by the Data Steward. Data Maintenance and Control Method: The process defined and approved by the Data Steward to handle the following tasks: • Definition of access controls with assigned access, privilege enablement, and documented management approval, based on job functions and requirements. • Identification of valid Data sources • Acceptable methods for receiving Data from identified sources • Process for the verification of received Data • Rules, standards and guidelines for the entry of new Data, change of existing Data or deletion of Data • Rules, standards and guidelines for controlled access to Data • Process for Data integrity verification • Acceptable methods for distributing, releasing, sharing, storing or transferring Data • Acceptable Data locations • Providing for the security of Confidential Data and Operation Critical Data • Assuring sound methods for handling, processing, security and disaster recovery of Data • Assuring that Data are gathered, processed, shared and stored in accordance with the City privacy statement (to be written). Data Steward: The persons responsible for City functions and who determine Data Maintenance and Control Methods are Data Stewards. Electronic Data/Data: Distinct pieces of information, intentionally or unintentionally provided to the City in a variety of administrative, academic and business processes. This policy covers all Data stored on any electronic media, and within any computer systems defined as a City information technology resource. Appendix B: Information Security Policy Model 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 289 of 810 4 Mobile Computing Devices: Information technology resources of such devices include, but are not limited to, laptops, tablets, cell phones, smart phones, and other portable devices. Operation Critical Data: Data determined to be critical and essential to the successful operation of the City as a whole, and whose loss or corruption would cause a severe detrimental impact to continued operations. Data receiving this classification require a high level of protection against accidental d istribution, exposure or destruction, and must be covered by high quality disaster recovery and business contin uity measures. Data in this category include Data stored on Enterprise Systems such as Data passed through networked communications systems. Such Data may be released or shared under defined, specific procedures for disclosure, such as departmental guidelines, documented procedures or policies. City Provided Data Systems: Information technology resources, as defined and described by the City and used for the storage, maintenance and processing of City Data. Unrestricted Data: Information that may be released or shared as needed. Usage/Data Use: Usage and Data Use are used interchangeably and are defined as gathering, viewing, storing, sharing, transferring, distributing, modifying, printing and otherwise acting to provide a Data maintenance environment. PROCEDURES: 1. Data Stewardship Data Stewards are expected to create, communicate and enforce Data Maintenance and Control Methods. Data Stewards are also expected to have knowledge of functions in their areas and the Data and information used in support of those functions. The Chief Information Officer(CIO) is ultimately accountable for the Data management and stewardship of all the City data. The CIO may appoint others in their respective areas of responsibility. 2. Data Maintenance and Control Method Data Stewards will develop and maintain Data Maintenance and Control Methods for their assigned systems. When authorizing and assigning access controls defined in the Data Maintenance and Control Methods involving Confidential Data and Operation Critical Data, Data Stewards will restrict user privileges to the least access necessary to perform job functions based on job role and res ponsibility. If the system is a City Provided Data System, City Technology Services will provide, upon request, guidance and services for the tasks identified in the Data Maintenance and Control Method. If the system is provided by a Public Cloud, the Data Steward must still verify that the Data Maintenance and Control Method used by the Public Cloud provider meets current City technology standards (to be written)?. Further, ongoing provisions for meeting current City technology and security standards (to be written)? must be included in the service contract. Appendix B: Information Security Policy Model 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 290 of 810 5 Review of Public Cloud solutions must include City Technology Services and City Attorney prior to final solution selection and purchase. Use of personal equipment to conduct City business must comply with all guidance provided by City policies (to be written)?. 3. Data Custodianship Data Custodians will use Data in compliance with the established Data Maintenance and Control Method. Failure to process or handle Data in compliance with the established method for a system will be considered a violation of the City policies. 4. Data Usage In all cases, Data provided to the City will be used in accordance with the Privacy Statement (to be written) Software solutions, including SaaS solutions, are selected to manage Data and are procured, purchased and installed in conjunction with City (to be written) Data will be released in accordance with City (to be written). Requests for information from external agencies (such as Freedom of Information Act requests, subpoenas, law enforcement agency requests, or any other request for Data from an external source) must be directed to the City Attorney and processed in accordance with existing policies. Standards for secure file transmissions, or Data exch anges, must be evaluated by the CIO when a system other than a City Provided Data System is selected or when a Public Cloud is utilized. Specific contract language may be required. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Unencrypted authorization and Data transmission are not acceptable. Communication of Confidential Data via end-user messaging technologies (i.e., email, instant messaging, chat or other communication methods) is prohibited 5. Storing Data Data cannot be stored on a system other than a City Provided Data System without the advance permission of the Data Steward and demonstrated legitimate ne ed. Data should be stored in encrypted formats whenever possible. Confidential Data must be stored in encrypted formats. Encryption strategies should be reviewed with City Technology Services in advance to avoid accidental Data lockouts. Data cannot be stored on a City-provided Computing Device unless the device is encrypted without the advance permission of the Data Steward and demonstrated legitimate need. Data must be stored on devices and at locations approved by Data Stewards. If information techn ology resources (computers, printers and other items) are stored at an off-campus location, the location must be approved by Data Stewards prior to using such resources to store City Data. Appendix B: Information Security Policy Model 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 291 of 810 6 Technology enables the storage of Data on fax machines, copiers, cell phones, point-of-sale devices and other electronic equipment. Data Stewards are responsible for discovery of stored Data and removal of the Data prior to release of the equipment. When approving Mobile Computing Device Usage, Data Stewards must verify that those using Mobile Computing Devices can provide information about what Data was stored on the device (such as a cop y of the last backup) in the event the device is lost or stolen. In all cases, Data storage must comply with City retention policies. Data Usage in a Public Cloud system must have specific retention standards(to be written)? written in the service contract. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Provisions for the return of all City Data in the event of contract termination must be included in the contract, when Data is stored on a Public Cloud. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Current security standards (to be written)? (such as controlled access, personal firewalls, antivirus, fully updated and patched operating systems, etc.) will be evaluated when a system other than a City Provided Data System is selected and must be covered in contract language. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Data stored on Mobile Computing Devices must be protected by current security standard methods (such as controlled access, firewalls, antivirus, fully updated and patched operating systems, etc.). City standard procedures (to be written) for the protection and safeguarding of Confidential Data and Operation Critical Data must be applied equally and without exception to City Provided Data Systems, Mobile Computing Devices and systems other than City Provided Data Systems, such as Public Cloud solution. 6. Systems and network Data Systems and network Data, generated through systems or network administration, logs or other system recording activities, cannot be used, or captured, gathered, analyzed or disseminated, without the advance permission of the Chief Information Officer. 7. Value of Data In all cases where Data are to be processed through a Public Cloud, the following assessment must be d one: The value of the Data must be determined in some tangible way. Signature approval from the Data Steward’s division vice president or ap propriate party with the ability to authorize activity at the level of the value of the Data must be obtained. 8. Sanctions Failure to follow the guidelines contained in this document will be considered inappropriate use of a City information technology resource and therefore a violation of the City policy(to be written). 9. Data Security Breach Review Panel A Data Security Breach Review Panel (Panel) comprised of the following members will be established: o Chief Information Officer Appendix B: Information Security Policy Model 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 292 of 810 7 o Chief of Police o City Attorney o Chief Privacy Officer 10. Data Loss Prevention Software Define granular access rights for removable devices and peripheral ports and establish policies for users, computers and groups, maintaining productivity while enforcing device security 11. Audits All City owned equipment is subject to audit for unauthorized storage of regulated data. Devices authorized to store regulated data are subject to audits as deemed necessary by the CIO. Reasonable prior notification of an audit will be provided. Audit results are handled confidentially by Information Security staff and are reported to the CIO in aggregate. 12. Mobile Devices City owned mobile equipment will be exclusively allowed on the City’s primary network and use two factor authentication. All personal devices must use “guest” access if provided. Appendix B: Information Security Policy Model 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 293 of 810 Appendix C: Public Disclosure and Review Process Note: The task force is attaching this excerpt from a slide presentation that describes the City of Oakland’s process for acquiring new surveillance technology. The diagram was not developed by the task force and does not correspond exactly to the process recommended by the task force for the City of Chula Vista; however, it provides a useful illustration of the general order of review intended by the task force for Chula Vista. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 294 of 810 How does the Surveillance Ordinance work in practice? Notification •City entity notifies PAC Chair of its wish to acquire new surveillance technology. Report Submission •City entity submits a Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance Use Policy to the Privacy Advisory Commission for its review at a regularly noticed meeting. PAC Evaluation •PAC reviews documentation, works with City entity to revise Impact Report and Use Policy •Recommends that the City Council adopt, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. Public Notice •City Council provides public notice that will include the Surveillance Impact Report, proposed Surveillance Use Policy, and Privacy Advisory Commission recommendation at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. Public Hearing •City Council determination: 1) benefits to the community outweighs the costs; 2) proposal will safeguard civil liberties and civil rights; and 3) no alternative with a lesser economic cost or impact on civil rights or civil liberties would be as effective. Process for city to acquire or use a surveillance technology Appendix C: Public Disclosure and Review ProcessAppendix C: Public Disclosure and Review ProcessAppendix C: Public Disclosure and Review Process 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 295 of 810 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Note: The task force is attaching the following draft ordinances submitted by community members in recognition of the role they played in helping to shape the task force’s recommendations. The inclusion of these draft ordinances is not an endorsement by the task force, as the task force did not review these draft ordinances with the same level of diligence as the final task force recommendations. The draft ordinances are focused on surveillance, which the task force considers to be one part of the broader subject area of privacy and security. The task force encourages the City to continue seeking community feedback and also reviewing similar models, such as the recently adopted San Diego TRUST ordinance. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 296 of 810 Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance (Revised - July 15, 2022) ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER XXXX TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING RULES FOR THE CITY’S ACQUISITION AND USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista (“City”) takes great public pride in its status as a Welcoming City and as a Smart City; and WHEREAS, smart public safety decisions and the protection of all community members require that municipalities ensure public debate and community involvement in decisions about whether to acquire or use surveillance technology; moreover, that real public safety requires that residents have a voice in these decisions; and WHEREAS, across the U.S. cities that have adhered to a “privacy bill of rights” approach are able to win public support in implementing the technology with proper safeguards in place to build trust. Alternatively, cities that implement new technology in secrecy, without oversight, without policy, and without broad and inclusive public input have found themselves facing scrutiny, lawsuits, and voter referendums to ban certain technologies. WHEREAS, the City Council finds it is essential to have an informed public debate as early as possible about decisions related to the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, while the use of surveillance technology may threaten the privacy of all citizens, throughout history, surveillance efforts have been used to intimidate and oppress certain communities and groups more than others, including those that are defined by a common race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, income level, sexual orientation or political perspective; and WHEREAS, while acknowledging the significance of protecting the privacy of citizens, the City Council finds that surveillance technology may also be a valuable tool to bolster community safety and aid in the investigation and prosecution of crimes; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing non-public places or information (such as wiretaps) but also may include technology which aggregates publicly available information, because such information, in the aggregate or when pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal a wealth of detail about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or sexual associations; and 1 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 297 of 810 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that no decisions relating to the City’s use of surveillance technology should occur without strong consideration being given to the impact such technologies may have on civil rights and civil liberties, including those rights guaranteed by the California and United States Constitutions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that any and all decisions regarding if and how the City’s surveillance technologies should be funded, acquired, or used should include meaningful public input and that public opinion should be given significant weight in policy decisions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that legally enforceable safeguards, including robust transparency, oversight, and accountability measures, must be in place to protect civil rights and civil liberties before any City surveillance technology is deployed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that if a surveillance technology is approved, data reporting measures must be adopted that empower the City Council and public to verify that mandated civil rights and civil liberties safeguards have been strictly adhered to. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: Section I. Establishment A.This Ordinance shall be known as the Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance. B.Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter XXXX,is hereby added as set forth below: Chapter XXXX. REGULATIONS ON CITY’S ACQUISITION AND USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY C.Definitions 1.“Annual Surveillance Report” means a written report concerning a specific surveillance technology that includes all the following: a.A description of how the surveillance technology was used, including the type and quantity of data gathered or analyzed by the technology; b.Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the surveillance technology was shared with internal or external entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed, under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the disclosure(s) except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; c.Where applicable, a description of the physical objects to which the surveillance technology hardware was installed without revealing the specific location of such 2 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 298 of 810 hardware; for surveillance technology software, a breakdown of what data sources the surveillance technology was applied to; d.Where applicable, a description of where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically, by each Police Area in the relevant year; e.A summary of community complaints or concerns about the surveillance technology, and an analysis of its Surveillance Use Policy and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and civil liberties. The analysis shall consider whether, and to what extent, the use of the surveillance technology disproportionately impacts certain groups or individuals; f.The results of any internal audits or investigations relating to surveillance technology, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.To the extent that the public release of such information is prohibited by law, City staff shall provide a confidential report to the City Council regarding this information to the extent allowed by law; g.Information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; h.A general description of all methodologies used to detect incidents of data breaches or unauthorized access, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; I.Information, including crime statistics, that helps the community assess whether the surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified purposes; i.Statistics and information about Public Records Act requests regarding the relevant subject surveillance technology, including response rates, such as the number of Public Records Act requests on such surveillance technology and the open and close date for each of these Public Records Act requests; j.Total annual costs for the surveillance technology,including personnel and other ongoing costs, and what source of funding will fund the surveillance technology in the coming year; and k.Any requested modifications to the Surveillance Use Policy and a detailed basis for the request. 3 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 299 of 810 2.“City” means any department, unit, program, and/or subordinate division of the City of Chula Vista as provided by Chapter XXXX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 3.“City staff” means City personnel authorized by the City Manager or appropriate City department head to seek City Council Approval of Surveillance Technology in conformance with this Chapter. 4.“Community meeting” means a publicly held meeting that is accessible, noticed at least seventy-two hours in advance in at least two languages, for the purpose of educating communities, answering questions, and learning about potential impacts of surveillance technology on disadvantaged groups. 5.“Continuing agreement” means a written agreement that automatically renews unless terminated by one or more parties. 6.“Exigent circumstances” means a City department’s good faith belief that an emergency involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any individual requires the use of surveillance technology that has not received prior approval by City Council. 7.“Facial recognition technology” means an automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual based on an individual’s face. 8.“Individual” means a natural person. 9.“Personal communication device” means a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant, a wireless capable tablet and a similar wireless two-way communications and/or portable internet-accessing device, whether procured or subsidized by a City entity or personally owned, that is used in the regular course of City business. 10.“Police area” refers to each of the geographic districts assigned to a Chula Vista Police Department captain or commander and as such districts are amended from time to time. 11.“Surveillance” (or “spying”) means to observe or analyze the movements, behavior, data, or actions of individuals. Individuals include those whose identity can be revealed by data or combinations of data, such as license plate data, images, IP addresses, user identifications, unique digital identifiers, or data traces left by the individual. 12.“Surveillance technology” means any software (e.g., scripts, code, Application Programming Interfaces), electronic device, or system utilizing an electronic device used, designed, or primarily intended to observe, collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group. It also includes the product (e.g., audiovisual recording, data, analysis, report) of such surveillance technology. Examples of surveillance technology include, but are not limited to the following: cell site simulators (Stingrays); automated license plate readers; gunshot detectors (ShotSpotter); drone-mounted data collection; 4 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 300 of 810 facial recognition software; thermal imaging systems; body-worn cameras; social media analytics software; gait analysis software; video cameras that can record audio or video and transmit or be remotely accessed. It also includes software designed to monitor social media services or forecast and/or predict criminal activity or criminality, and biometric identification hardware or software. “Surveillance technology” does not include devices, software, or hardware, unless they have been equipped with, or are modified to become or include, a surveillance technology beyond what is set forth below or used beyond a purpose as set forth below: a.Routine office hardware, such as televisions,computers, credit card machines, badge readers, copy machines, and printers, that is in widespread use and will not be used for any public surveillance or law enforcement functions related to the public; b.Parking Ticket Devices (PTDs) used solely for parking enforcement-related purposes, including any sensors embedded in parking sensors to detect the presence of a car in the space; c.Manually-operated, non-wearable, handheld digital cameras, audio recorders, and video recorders that are not designed to be used surreptitiously and whose functionality is limited to manually-capturing and manually-downloading video and/or audio recordings; d.Surveillance devices that cannot record or transmit audio or video or be remotely accessed, such as image stabilizing binoculars or night vision goggles; e.Manually-operated technological devices used primarily for internal municipal entity communications and are not designed to surreptitiously collect surveillance data, such as radios and email systems; f.City databases that do not contain any data or other information collected, captured, recorded, retained, processed, intercepted, or analyzed by surveillance technology, including payroll, accounting, or other fiscal databases; g.Medical equipment used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease or injury, provided that any information obtained from this equipment is used solely for medical purposes; h.Police department interview room cameras; i.City department case management systems; j.Personal Communication Devices that have not been modified beyond stock manufacturer capabilities in a manner described above; 5 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 301 of 810 k.Surveillance technology used by the City solely to monitor and conduct internal investigations involving City employees, contractors, and volunteers; and, l.Systems, software, databases, and data sources used for revenue collection on behalf of the City by the City Treasurer, provided that no information from these sources is shared by the City Treasurer with any other City department or third-party except as part of efforts to collect revenue that is owed to the City. 14. “Surveillance Impact Report” means a publicly-posted written report including, at a minimum, the following: a.Description: Information describing the surveillance technology and how it works, including product descriptions from manufacturers; b.Purpose: Information on the proposed purposes(s) for the surveillance technology; c.Location: The physical or virtual location(s)it may be deployed, using general descriptive terms, and crime statistics for any location(s); d.Impact: An assessment of the Surveillance Use Policy for the particular technology and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and liberties and whether the surveillance technology was used or deployed, intentionally or inadvertently, in a manner that may disproportionately affect marginalized communities; e.Mitigations: Identify specific, affirmative technical and procedural measures that will be implemented to safeguard the public from each identified impact; f.Data Types and Sources: A list of all types and sources of data to be collected, analyzed, or processed by the surveillance technology, including open source data, scores, reports, logic or algorithm used, and any additional information derived therefrom; g.Data Security: Information about the controls that will be designed and implemented to ensure that adequate security objectives are achieved to safeguard the data collected or generated by the surveillance technology from unauthorized access or disclosure; h.Fiscal Costs and Sources: The forecasted, prior, and ongoing fiscal costs for the surveillance technology, including initial purchase, personnel, and other ongoing costs, and any past, current or potential sources of funding; 6 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 302 of 810 i.Third-Party Dependence: Whether use or maintenance of the surveillance technology will require data gathered by the surveillance technology to be handled or stored by a third-party vendor at any time; j.Alternatives: A summary of all alternative methods (whether involving the use of a new technology or not) considered before deciding to use the proposed surveillance technology, including the costs and benefits associated with each alternative and an explanation of the reasons why each alternative is inadequate; k.Track Record: A summary of the experience (if any) other entities, especially government entities, have had with the proposed technology, including, if available, quantitative information about the effectiveness of the proposed surveillance technology in achieving its stated purpose in other jurisdictions, and any known adverse information about the surveillance technology such as unanticipated costs, failures, or civil rights and civil liberties abuses, existing publicly reported controversies, and any court rulings in favor or in opposition to the surveillance; and l.Public engagement and comments: A description of any community engagement held and any future community engagement plans, number of attendees, a compilation of all comments received and City departmental responses given, and City departmental conclusions about potential neighborhood impacts and how such impacts may differ as it pertains to different segments of the community that may result from the acquisition of surveillance technology. 15. "Surveillance Use Policy" means a publicly-released and legally-enforceable policy for use of the surveillance technology that at a minimum specifies the following: a.Purpose: The specific purpose(s) that the surveillance technology is intended to advance; b.Use: The specific uses that are authorized, and the rules and processes required prior to such use; c.Data Collection: The information that can be collected, captured, recorded, intercepted, or retained by the surveillance technology, as well as data that might be inadvertently collected during the authorized uses of the surveillance technology and what measures will be taken to minimize and delete such data. Where applicable, any data sources the surveillance technology will rely upon, including open source data, should be listed; 7 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 303 of 810 d.Data Access: The job classification of individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the rules and processes required prior to access or use of the information; e.Data Protection: The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access, including logging, encryption, and access control mechanisms; f.Data Retention: The time period, if any, for which information collected by the surveillance technology will be routinely retained, the reason such retention period is appropriate to further the purpose(s), the process by which the information is regularly deleted after that period lapses, and the specific conditions that must be met to retain information beyond that period; g.Public Access: A description of how collected information can be accessed or used by members of the public, including criminal defendants; h.Third Party Data Sharing: If and how information obtained from the surveillance technology can be used or accessed, including any required justification or legal standard necessary to do so and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information; i.Training: The training required for any individual authorized to use the surveillance technology or to access information collected by the surveillance technology; j.Auditing and Oversight: The procedures used to ensure that the Surveillance Use Policy is followed, including internal personnel assigned to ensure compliance with the policy, internal recordkeeping of the use of the surveillance technology or access to information collected by the surveillance technology, technical measures to monitor for misuse, any independent person or entity with oversight authority, and the legally enforceable sanctions for violations of the policy; and k.Maintenance: The procedures used to ensure that the security and integrity of the surveillance technology and collected information will be maintained. Section II. Privacy Advisory Commission (“Commission”) Notification and Review Requirements A.Commission Notification Required Prior to City Solicitation of Funds and Proposals for Surveillance Technology. 1. City staff shall notify the Chair of the Commission by written memorandum along with providing a Surveillance Use Policy and a Surveillance Impact Report prior to: 8 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 304 of 810 a.Seeking or soliciting funds for surveillance technology, including but not limited to applying for a grant; b.Soliciting proposals with any entity to acquire, share or otherwise use surveillance technology including the information it provides; or c. Formally or informally facilitating in a meaningful way or implementing surveillance technology in collaboration with other entities, including City ones. 2. Upon notification by City staff, the Chair of the Commission shall place the item on the agenda at the next Commission meeting for discussion and possible action. At this meeting, City staff shall present the Commission with evidence of the need for the funds or equipment, or shall otherwise justify the action City staff will seek Council approval for pursuant to Section III. 3. The Commission may make a recommendation to the City Council by voting for approval to proceed, by objecting to the proposal, by recommending that the City staff modify the proposal, or by taking no action. 4. If the Commission votes to approve, object, or modify the proposal, City staff may proceed and seek City Council approval of the proposed surveillance technology initiative pursuant to the requirements of Section III. City staff shall present to City Council the result of the Commission’s review, including any objections to the proposal. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on the item within 90 calendar days of notification to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed and seek City Council approval of the proposed Surveillance Technology initiative pursuant to the requirements of Section II. B.Commission Review and Approval Required for New Surveillance Technology Before City Council Approval 1. Prior to seeking City Council approval under Section III, City staff shall submit a Surveillance Impact Report and a Surveillance Use Policy for the proposed new surveillance technology initiative to the Commission for its review at a publicly noticed meeting. The Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy must address the specific subject matter specified for each document as set forth in Section I. 2. The Commission shall approve, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. If the Commission proposes that the Surveillance Use Policy be modified, the Commission shall propose such modifications to City staff. City staff shall present such modifications to the Commission for approval before seeking City Council approval under Section III. 3. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report, City staff shall complete one or more community meetings in each City Council district where the proposed surveillance 9 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 305 of 810 technology is deployed, with opportunity for public comment and written response. The City Council may condition its approval of the proposed surveillance technology on City staff conducting additional community engagement before approval, or after approval as a condition of approval. 4. The Commission shall recommend that the City Council adopt, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. If the Commission proposes that the Surveillance Use Policy be modified, the Commission shall propose such modifications to City staff. City staff shall present such modifications to City Council when seeking City Council approval under Section III. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on a presented item within 90 days of notification to the Commission Chair pursuant to Section II, City staff may seek City Council approval of the item. 6. City staff seeking City Council approval shall schedule for City Council consideration and approval of the proposed Surveillance Use Policy, and include Commission recommendations, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a mandatory, properly noticed, germane public hearing. Approval may only occur at a public hearing. C.Commission Review Requirements for Existing Surveillance Technology Before Seeking City Council Approval 1. Prior to seeking City Council approval for existing City surveillance technology used by the City under Section III, City staff shall submit a Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy for each existing surveillance technology to the Commission for its review, and for the public’s review, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a publicly noticed meeting, so the public can prepare for and participate in the Commission meetings. The Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy shall address the specific subject matters set forth for each document in Section I. 2. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report, City staff shall complete one or more community meetings in each City Council district where the proposed surveillance technology is deployed with opportunity for public comment and written response. The City Council may condition its approval on City staff conducting additional outreach before approval, or after approval as a condition of approval. 3. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance Use Policy as described above, City staff shall present to the Commission, and for public review, a list of all surveillance technology possessed and/or used by the City. 4. The Commission shall rank the surveillance technology items in order of potential impact to civil liberties to provide a recommended sequence for items to be heard at Commission meetings. The Commission shall take into consideration input from City 10 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 306 of 810 staff on the operational importance of the surveillance technology in determining the ranking to allow such matters to be heard in a timely manner. 5. Within sixty (60) days of the Commission’s action in Section II(C)(4), and continuing every month thereafter until a Surveillance Impact Report and a Surveillance Use Policy have been submitted for each item of the list, City staff shall submit at least one (1) Surveillance Impact Report and one (1) proposed Surveillance Use Policy per month to the Commission for review, generally beginning with the highest ranking surveillance technology items as determined by the Commission. 6. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on any item within 90 days of submission to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed to the City Council for approval of the item pursuant to Section III. Section III. City Council Approval Requirements for New and Existing Surveillance Technology A. City staff shall obtain City Council approval prior to any of the following: 1. Accepting local, state, or federal funds, or in-kind or other donations for surveillance technology; x2. Acquiring new surveillance technology, including but not limited to procuring such technology without the exchange of monies or consideration; 3. Using existing surveillance technology, or using new surveillance technology, including the information the surveillance technology provides, for a purpose, in a manner, or in a location not previously approved by the City Council pursuant to the requirements of this ordinance; or 4. Entering into a continuing agreement or written agreement with to acquire, share or otherwise use surveillance technology or the information it provides, including data-sharing agreements. 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, nothing herein shall be construed to prevent, restrict or interfere with any person providing evidence or information derived from surveillance technology to a law enforcement agency for the purposes of conducting a criminal investigation or the law enforcement agency from receiving such evidence or information. B.City Council Approval Process 1. After the Commission notification and review requirements in Section II have been met, City staff seeking City Council approval shall schedule a date for City Council consideration of the proposed Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance 11 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 307 of 810 Use Policy, and include Commission recommendations, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a mandatory, properly-noticed, germane public hearing. Approval may only occur at a public hearing. 2. The City Council shall only approve any action as provided in this Chapter after first considering the recommendation of the Commission, and subsequently making a determination that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology outweigh the costs; that the proposal will safeguard civil liberties and civil rights; and that, in the City Council’s judgment, no alternative with a lesser economic cost or impact on civil rights or civil liberties would be as effective. 3. For Approval of existing surveillance technology for which the Commission does not make its recommendation within ninety (90) days of review as provided for in Section II: if the City Council has not reviewed and approved such item within four (4) City Council meetings from when the item was initially scheduled for City Council consideration, the City shall cease its use of the surveillance technology until such review and approval occurs. C.Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies as Public Records 1.Unless otherwise provided in this Ordinance, Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies are public records. 2.City staff shall make all Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies, as updated from time to time, available to the public as long as the City uses the surveillance technology in accordance with its request pursuant to Section II. 3.City staff shall post all Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies to the City’s website with an indication of its current approval status and the planned City Council date for action. Section IV.Use of Unapproved Surveillance Technology during Exigent Circumstances A. City staff may temporarily acquire or use surveillance technology and the data derived from that use in a manner not expressly allowed by a Surveillance Use Policy only in a situation involving exigent circumstances. B. If City staff acquires or uses a surveillance technology in a situation involving exigent circumstances, City staff shall: 1.Immediately report in writing the use of the surveillance technology and its justifications to the City Council and the Commission; 2.Use the surveillance technology solely to respond to the exigent circumstances; 3.Cease using the surveillance technology when the exigent circumstances end; 12 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 308 of 810 4.Only keep and maintain data related to the exigent circumstances and dispose of any data that is not relevant to an ongoing investigation or the exigent circumstances; and 5.Following the end of the exigent circumstances, report the temporary acquisition or use of the surveillance technology for exigent circumstances to the Commission in accordance with Section II of this ordinance at its next meeting for discussion and possible recommendation to the City Council. C. Any surveillance technology acquired in accordance with exigent circumstances shall be returned within thirty (30) calendar days following when the exigent circumstances end, unless City staff initiates the process set forth for the use of the surveillance technology by submitting a Surveillance Use Policy and Surveillance Impact Report for Commission review within this 30-day time period. If City staff is unable to meet the 30-day deadline, City staff shall notify the City Council, who may grant an extension. In the event that City staff complies with the 30-day deadline or the deadline as may be extended by the City Council, City staff may retain possession of the surveillance technology, but may only use such surveillance technology consistent with the requirements of this Ordinance. Section V. Oversight Following City Council Approval A.Annual Surveillance Report 1. For each approved surveillance technology item, City staff shall present a written Annual Surveillance Report for the Commission to review within one year after the date of City Council final passage of such surveillance technology and annually thereafter as long as the surveillance technology is used. 2. If City staff is unable to meet the annual deadline, City staff shall notify the Commission in writing of staff’s request to extend this period, and the reasons for that request. The Commission may grant a single extension of up to sixty (60) calendar days to comply with this provision. 3. After review of the Annual Surveillance Report by the Commission, City staff shall submit the Report to the City Council. 4. The Commission shall recommend to the City Council: (a) that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology in question outweigh the costs and that civil liberties and civil rights are safeguarded; (b) that use of the surveillance technology cease; or (c) propose modifications to the corresponding Surveillance Use Policy that will resolve any identified concerns. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on the item within 90 calendar days of submission of the Annual Surveillance Report to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed to the City Council for approval of the Annual Surveillance Report. B.Summary Of All Requests And Recommendations And City Council Determination 13 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 309 of 810 1. In addition to the above submission of any Annual Surveillance Report, City staff shall provide in its report to the City Council a summary of all requests for City Council approval pursuant to Section III for that particular surveillance technology and the pertinent Commission recommendation, including whether the City Council approved or rejected the proposal and/or required changes to a proposed Surveillance Use Policy before approval. 2. Based upon information provided in the Annual Surveillance Report and after considering the recommendation of the Commission, the City Council shall revisit its “cost benefit” analysis as provided in Section III(B)(2) and either uphold or set aside the previous determination. Should the City Council set aside its previous determination, the City’s use of the surveillance technology must cease. Alternatively, City Council may require modifications to a particular Surveillance Use Policy that will resolve any concerns with the use of a particular surveillance technology. Section VI. Enforcement A.Violations of this article are subject to the following remedies: 1. Any material violation of this Ordinance, or of a Surveillance Use Policy promulgated pursuant to this Ordinance, constitutes an injury and any person may institute proceedings for injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or writ of mandate in the Superior Court of the State of California to enforce this Ordinance. An action instituted under this paragraph shall be brought against the City of Chula Vista and, if necessary, to effectuate compliance with this Ordinance or a Surveillance Use Policy (including to expunge information unlawfully collected, retained, or shared thereunder), any other governmental agency with possession, custody, or control of data subject to this Ordinance, to the extent permitted by law. 2. Any person who has been subjected to the use of surveillance technology in material violation of this Ordinance, or of a material violation of a Surveillance Use Policy, or about whom information has been obtained, retained, accessed, shared, or used in violation of this Ordinance or of a Surveillance Use Policy promulgated under this Ordinance, may institute proceedings in the Superior Court of the State of California against the City of Chula Vista and shall be entitled to recover actual damages (but not less than liquidated damages of $1,000 or $100 per day for each day of violation, whichever is greater). 3. A court may award costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the plaintiff who is the prevailing party in an action brought under paragraphs A(1) and A(2) under Section VI above. 14 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 310 of 810 Section VII. Contract for Surveillance Technology A.Contracts and agreements for surveillance technology 1.It shall be unlawful for the City to enter into any contract or other agreement for surveillance technology that conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance. Any conflicting provisions in any such contract or agreements, including but not limited to non-disclosure agreements, shall be deemed void and legally unenforceable. Any amendment or exercise of any option to any contract to obtain or use surveillance technology shall require City staff to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. 2.To the extent permitted by law, the City shall publicly disclose all of its surveillance contracts, including any and all related non-disclosure agreements, if any, regardless of any contract terms to the contrary. Section VIII. Whistleblower Protections A. Neither the City nor anyone acting on behalf of the City may take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant for employment, including but not limited to discriminating with respect to compensation, terms and conditions of employment, access to information, restrictions on due process rights, or civil or criminal liability, because: 1.The employee or applicant was perceived to, about to, or assisted in any lawful disclosure of information concerning the funding, acquisition, or use of a surveillance technology or surveillance data based upon a good faith belief that the disclosure evidenced a violation of this Ordinance; or 2.The employee or applicant was perceived to, about to, had assisted in or had participated in any proceeding or action to carry out the purposes of this Ordinance. B. It shall be grounds for disciplinary action for a City employee or anyone else acting on behalf of the City to retaliate against another City employee or applicant who makes a good-faith complaint that there has been a failure to comply with any Surveillance Use Policy or administrative instruction promulgated under this Ordinance. C. Any employee or applicant who is injured by a violation of this Section may institute a proceeding for monetary damages and injunctive relief against the City in any court of competent jurisdiction. 15 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 311 of 810 Section IX. Review of Existing Surveillance Use Policies and Adoption as Ordinances A. Surveillance technology is considered existing if the City possessed, used, or has a contract in force and effect for the use of surveillance technology, or any resulting data, on the effective date of this Ordinance. B. The requirement for City staff to present a list of all existing surveillance technology and, once ranked, to seek monthly Commission review and approval for the use of existing surveillance technology shall begin within sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Ordinance. C. As per Section II, City staff shall return to City Council with an ordinance or ordinances for adoption and codification under the Chula Vista Municipal Code of all Surveillance Use Policies, but only after proper Commission and City Council review of any Surveillance Use Policies for existing surveillance technology, and with a 15-day public notice period in each instance to allow the public to prepare and participate in the meetings. Section X. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. Section XI. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section XII. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. 16 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 312 of 810 Section XIII. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by 17 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 313 of 810 Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance (Revised - July 15, 2022) ORDINANCE NO. _________________ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CHULA VISTA PRIVACY ADVISORY COMMISSION PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS THEREOF, AND DEFINING THE DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF SAID COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council (City Council) finds that the use of surveillance technology is important to protect public health and safety, but such use must be appropriately monitored and regulated to protect the privacy and other rights of Chula Vista residents and visitors, and WHEREAS the City of Chula Vista (the City) has been building on a detailed Smart City Strategic Action Plan since 2017 with limited opportunity for community input, oversight or control; and WHEREAS Chula Vista seeks to maintain its designation by Welcoming America as a certified Welcoming City, City Council strives to comply with the criteria in the Welcoming Standard, in particular, relevant criteria relating to “Safe Communities”, “Equitable Access”, and “Civic Engagement”; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the use of open data associated with surveillance technology offers benefits to the City, but those benefits must also be weighed against the costs, both fiscal and civil liberties; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that surveillance technology may be a valuable tool to support community safety, investigations, and prosecution of crimes, but must be balanced with the individual’s right to privacy, it also; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that privacy is not just a personal matter; there are societal consequences to privacy degradation over time as well as societal benefits with increased trust and transparency; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing non-public places or information, but also may include technology that aggregates publicly-available information, which, in the aggregate or when 1 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 314 of 810 pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal details about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or intimate associations; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that government surveillance may chill associational and expressive freedoms; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that data from surveillance technology can be used to intimidate and oppress certain groups more than others, including those that are defined by a common race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, income level, sexual orientation, or political perspective; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that safeguards, including robust transparency, oversight, and accountability measures, must be in place to protect civil rights and civil liberties before City surveillance technology is deployed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that decisions regarding if and how the City’s surveillance technologies should be funded, acquired, or used should include meaningful public input; and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, City Council unanimously approved creation of a “Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force” to draft policy and recommendations to be presented to the City Council for consideration, and further requested that the City Administration prepare a “Citywide Technology Oversight Policy”; and WHEREAS, the said Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force recommends creation of a new permanent citizen advisory board known as the “Privacy Advisory Commision” to advise the Mayor and City Council on transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and usage of surveillance technology and data; and WHEREAS, Article VI, Section 600 of the City Charter reserves to the City Council the authority to create boards and commissions by ordinance, and to prescribe their function, powers, duties, membership, appointment, terms, qualifications, eligibility, reimbursements for expenses, if any; NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: Section I. Establishment A.Establishment and Appropriations Pursuant to Article VI of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista, there is hereby created a Chula Vista Privacy Advisory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Privacy Commission” or “Commission”). Appropriations of funds sufficient for the efficient and proper functioning of the Privacy Commission shall be included in the annual budget by the City Council. 2 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 315 of 810 B.Purpose and Intent It is the purpose and intent of the City Council to establish a Privacy Commission to serve as an advisory body to the Mayor and City Council on policies and issues related to privacy and surveillance. The Commission will provide advice intended to ensure transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. C.Definitions For purposes of this ordinance, all words defined in the CVMC Chapter XXXX, known as the Chula Vista Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance, have the same meaning herein. D.Membership The Privacy Advisory Commission shall consist of nine (9) members, who shall serve without compensation. At least six (6) members shall be Chula Vista residents. Members shall be appointed by the City Council. E.Qualifications of Members All members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall be persons who have a demonstrated interest in privacy rights through work experience, civic participation, and/or political advocacy. The City Council shall appoint the nine (9) members from the following representative areas of organization interest, expertise, and background: 1.At least one attorney or legal scholar with expertise in privacy or civil rights, or a representative of an organization with expertise in privacy or civil rights; 2.One auditor or certified public accountant; 3.One computer hardware, software, or encryption security professional; 4.One member of an organization that focuses on open government and transparency or an individual, such as a university researcher, with experience working on open government and transparency; and 5.At least four (4) members from equity-focused organizations serving or protecting the rights of communities and groups historically subject to disproportionate surveillance, including communities of color, immigrant communities, religious minorities, and groups concerned with privacy and protest. Member qualifications and eligibility shall be in accordance with Chula Vista Charter Article VI, Section 602, and CVCM Section 2.25.030. No member shall have a state law-prohibited financial interest, employment, or policy-making position in any commercial or for-profit facility, research center, or other organization that sells data products, surveillance equipment, or otherwise profits from recommendations made by the Privacy Advisory Commission. F.Terms 3 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 316 of 810 Pursuant to Article VI, Section 602 of the City Charter, members shall be appointed by motion of the City Council adopted by at least three affirmative votes. The members thereof shall serve for a term of four (4) years and until their respective successors are appointed and confirmed. Members shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) consecutive terms and an interval of two (2) years must pass before a person who has served two (2) consecutive terms may be reappointed to the body upon which the member had served. Initial members shall be appointed in staggered terms by lot. For the initial appointments, three (3) members shall be appointed to an initial term that will expire on June 30, 2023, and two (2) members shall be appointed to an initial term that will expire on June 30 of each subsequent year. Initial appointments to a term of two years or less shall not have the initial term count for purposes of the eight-year term limit. G.Rules The Commission shall hold regular meetings as required by ordinance of the City Council, and such special meetings as such commissions may require. All proceedings shall be open to the public. At the first regular meeting, and subsequently at the first regular meeting of each year following the first day of July of every year, members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall select a chairperson and a vice chairperson. The Commission shall adopt rules for the government of its business and procedures in compliance with the law. The Commission rules shall provide that a quorum of the Privacy Advisory Commission is five people. Pursuant to Article VI, Section 603 of the City Charter, the Commission shall have the same power as the City Council to compel the attendance of witnesses, to examine them under oath and to compel the production of evidence before it. Section II. Privacy Advisory Commission: Duties and Functions A.Duties and Functions The Privacy Advisory Commission shall: 1.Provide advice and technical assistance to the City on best practices to protect resident and visitor privacy rights in connection with the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. 2.Conduct meetings and use other public forums to collect and receive public input on the above subject matter. 3.Review Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies for all existing and new surveillance technology and make recommendations prior to the City seeking solicitation of funds and proposals for surveillance technology. 4.Submit annual reports and recommendations to the City Council regarding: 4 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 317 of 810 a.The City’s use of surveillance technology; and b.Whether new City surveillance technology privacy and data retention policies should be developed, or existing policies should be amended. c.Provide analysis to the City Council of pending federal, state, and local legislation relevant to the City’s purchase and/or use of surveillance technology. d.The Privacy Advisory Commission shall make reports, findings, and recommendations either to the City Manager or the City Council, as appropriate. The Commission shall present an annual written report to the City Council. The Commission may submit recommendations to the City Council following submission to the City Manager. B.Meetings and Voting The Commission shall meet at an established regular interval, day of the week, time, and location suitable for its purpose. Such meetings shall be designated regular meetings. Other meetings scheduled for a time or place other than the regular day, time and location shall be designated special meetings. Written notice of special meetings shall be provided to the Commission members, and all meetings of the Commission shall comport with any City or State open meetings laws, policies, or obligations. The Commission shall, in consultation with the City Manager, establish bylaws, rules and procedures for the conduct of its business by a majority vote of the members present. Voting shall be required for the adoption of any motion or resolution. Any action by the Commission shall be approved by a majority of members present, provided a quorum exists. C.Staff Staff assistance may be provided to the Board as determined by the City Manager, pursuant to his or her authority under the Charter to administer all affairs of the City under his or her jurisdiction. Section III. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. 5 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 318 of 810 Section IV. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section V. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. Section VI. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by:Approved as to form by 6 Appendix D: Sample OrdinancesAppendix D: Sample Ordinances 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 319 of 810 WRITTEN COMMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE TASK FORCE APRIL 25, 2022 - SEPTEMBER 26, 2022 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 1 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 320 of 810 MeetingDate AgendaItem Name Comment 5/9/2022 18:00 PUBLIC COMMENTS - ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Seth Hall Thank you to the City of Chula Vista and to Madaffer Enterprises for convening this important task force. As soon as possible, please consider voting on a resolution that reassures the viewing public that the task force chairperson and members have taken control of the task forces agenda. From an outside perspective, it appears so far that the agenda is controlled by a party who is not the chairperson, vice chairperson, or any seated member of the task force. This may have been necessary for the first meeting, but should no longer be the case going forward. In order for the public to have confidence the task force is being properly led by the communitys task force members, the task force must control its own agenda, and accordingly must control the minutes of the task force meeting. Each task force member is attaching their personal name to the work and outcomes of this task force, so each member deserves a fair and formal process for selecting how to spend the time you have. Thank you to each task force member for their volunteer time and attention to the important topic of privacy and surveillance technology. 5/9/2022 18:00 Presentation on privacy in other California cities Seth Hall Thank you to the City for assembling this summary of how so many cities are tackling the challenges of ensuring surveillance technology is operated according to best practices and designed to protect residents from potential abuse. As a member of the TRUST SD Coalitions Steering Committee, working on these same topics in San Diego, I personally would like to add that San Diego is on the cusp of adding a community-led oversight process that is very similar to the one in Oakland, which is summarized in the citys document. Our Privacy Advisory Board received final approval in April. The TRUST Surveillance Oversight ordinance is undergoing labor negotiations and is not far from reaching its approval. The TRUST SD Coalition only reached this goal by uplifting community voices that have been previously left out. I have enormous optimism that this task force will make recommendations that will rebalance the needs of government with the inalienable rights of residents. While Chula Vista and San Diego are separated by borders on a map, our two cities are profoundly intertwined, and our communities share many fates. As such, the TRUST SD Coalition is advocating for Chula Vista to be represented among the members of San Diegos upcoming Privacy Advisory Board. I hope our cities can be close collaborators in enabling only safe and effective surveillance technology in our region, while we all work to acknowledge and prioritize the fundamental rights of our community members. 6/8/2022 18:00 Receive and File Meeting Summaries Margaret Baker Thank you for providing notes in a timely manner. Here are some changes that would help the general public engage more easily: The agenda item numbers need to be included for each item in the notes. Also, the physical location of each meeting should be included. A link to the post-meeting agenda would facilitate access to public e-comments, attachments and PPT presentations, and video-recordings of the meetings. The background documents and other archived materials for the Task Force are not easy to find. The meeting summaries fail to list former City Manager Gary Halpert who was participating on the dais. Could his role please be clarified in the meeting notes? 6/17/2022 7:00 Sandra This is test from eSCRIBE at 8:42 AM EST 6/17/2022 7:00 Sandra I had the tab open never closed- leaving comment at 9:11 Am EST Comment was supposed to close at 9:00am EST Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 2 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 321 of 810 8/15/2022 18:00 PUBLIC COMMENTS Nancy Relaford This agenda seems like a last minute demolition of both the process and the timeline for the Task Forces work. Where did the idea come from to send barely discussed draft reports to City department heads and key staff for consideration and response at this point in the process, before recommendations have been finalized and submitted to the City Manager for her report to Council? All of the reports posted with the agenda are clearly preliminary and need research and discussion in the next weeks. They are not ready to be vetted for implementation by departments even in the most general sense. As just one example, the Privacy Oversight & Transparency Subcommittee Report draft would from editing and discussion: Disclaimer is used where Policy is meant; both may be needed, but the difference is critical More research is needed into existing legal requirements that the City is already bound to comply with (and whether it is currently in compliance); for example, ALPR operation, privacy policy, and breach disclosure are governed by CA SB-34: Automated license plate recognition systems: use of data. There are many more examples in all of the reports; the point is that these reports are not, and last we heard were not expected to be, complete enough after cursory discussion today to be considered and responded to outside of the Task Force process and original timeline. I trust the Task Force members will push back on this bizarre expectation. 8/15/2022 18:00 Work Session 3 Margaret Baker I am writing to thank Task Force members for their time, expertise, and commitment to set in place processes that will protect the civil liberties and proper governance of technology and data that the City is already using and types and uses going forward. I also am writing in strong opposition to the process proposed for tonight's Work Session. The Task Force should NOT submit the preliminary policy recommendations for consideration by City staff at this time. Community members have not had an opportunity to review them and the draft recommendations do not reflect the community's efforts to provide a process and ordinances to protect civili rights and civil liberties. The stated deadline for the work of the Task Force is already too short, and there is not adequate opportunity for deliberation and robust community input on these important policy provisions. 8/22/2022 18:00 Work Session 4 Nancy Relaford ADD" Any required notifications, policy postings, disclosures, signage, or other actions mandated under State law (e.g. SB-34) or other laws and ordinances must be researched, included in policies, and followed. When in doubt, the City should opt for broader adherence to the spirit of the law or requirement, rather than narrow technical compliance. In addition, Welcoming City criteria must be considered as part of surveillance technology policy and transparency review." Something like this needs to be added to the recommendations. There are very clear requirements for ALPR policy posting and breach notifications spelled out in SB34 and I'm sure other technologies have similar requirements that the city should be in compliance with. The part about the spirit of the law rather than technical compliance would have prevented the City deciding that sharing ALPR with ICE didnt violate state law because it doesn't technically contain PII. That was an extremely narrow and incorrect interpretation. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 3 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 322 of 810 April 25, 2022 City of Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Email: privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov RE: Surveillance Technology Ordinance Dear Members of the Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force: I write today on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a California-based nonprofit that advocates for civil liberties as society adopts more and more advanced technologies. Our organization has helped to develop, inform, and enforce municipal surveillance oversight programs across the United States. In my personal capacity, I was recently honored with the San Diego Society of Professional Journalists' Sunshine Award for bringing transparency to the types of surveillance in use across San Diego County.1 We congratulate the city of Chula Vista for taking this first step towards reviewing surveillance technologies through the lens of privacy. However, more needs to be done. We urge the Task Force to cooperate with local civil rights and social justice organizations to negotiate a robust surveillance oversight ordinance that allows for public involvement and transparency, and that designates the power of final approval of technology acquisitions and policies to elected officials. Too often, public safety agencies acquire powerful technologies after closed-door conversations with vendors, shutting the community out of discussions that will have a significant impact on their rights. Privacy, civil rights, and individual freedoms are often either an afterthought for officials or seen as a hindrance to investigations, when in reality addressing these issues is a crucial element to public safety and maintaining a healthy relationship between the government and its constituents. Without proper deliberation and safeguards, surveillance technology can have a number of deleterious effects, including misuse, racial and socio-economic bias, over-policing, and waste of public 1 Fraley, Malaika. "EFF Director of Investigations Dave Maass Honored With Sunshine Award For Driving Public Disclosure of Government Surveillance Records." Electronic Frontier Foundation. March 23, 2022. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/03/eff-director-investigations-dave-maass-honored-sunshine-award-dri ving-public EELECTRONIC FFFRONTIER FOUNDATION 815 Eddy Street, San Francisco, CA 94109 USA phone +l.415.436.9333 fax +l.415.436.9993 email info@eff.org eff.orgWrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 4 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 323 of 810 RE: Surveillance Technology Ordinance April 25, 2022 Page 2 of 3 funds. In recent years, the Chula Vista Police Department (CVPD) has adopted sophisticated surveillance technologies that have proven controversial and damaging to community relations. Of these, one of the most troubling has been the use of automated license plate readers to collect data on drivers, which CVPD was found to have shared with immigration enforcement agencies in apparent violation of multiple state laws.2 CVPD has also deployed the "Drones as First Responders" program, an unorthodox system at odds with commonly accepted use across the United States. While many police agencies use drones sparingly for emergency situations, swat operations, or documenting crime scenes, CVPD has deployed drones more than 10,000 times to respond to routine calls for service, including a variety of low-level incidents such as vandalism and people sleeping in public.In fact, welfare checks and psychological evaluations accountedfor34 19% of drone-involved cases—incidents that social workers and mental health professionals would be better suited to address than remote-controlled police robots. If a member of the community were to read CVPD's formal policy for Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations, they would discover a bare, 2½-page document generated by the company Lexipol.They would not get a clear understanding of how theprogram5 works or what safeguards are in place. In addition,Voice of San Diego raised legitimate questions about the relationship between CVPD officers and the drone vendor, which has resulted in an employment "revolving door."6 CVPD has been planning to build a real-time crime center (RTCC), a surveillance facility that would allow police to analyze and combine data from a large variety of sources, including drones and license plate readers.This model of policing, pushed byvendors7 with much to gain, should raise red flags for public officials, especially without strong 7 Marx, Jesse. "Chula Vista Is Building a Real-Time Crime Center." Voice of San Diego. Sept. 2, 2021. https://voiceofsandiego.org/2021/09/02/chula-vista-is-building-a-real-time-crime-center/ 6 Mejías Pascoe, Sophia. "Chula Vista PD’s Drone Program Opened a Revolving Door for Officers." Voice of San Diego. April 6, 2021. https://voiceofsandiego.org/2021/04/05/chula-vista-pds-drone-program-opened-a-revolving-door-for-officer s/ 5 Chula Vista Police Department. "Policy 613: Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations." February 20, 2020. https://www.chulavistaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/16381/637178753321100000 4 Mejías Pascoe, Sophia. "Police Drone Footage Is Off Limits – Unless This Legal Challenge Takes Flight." Voice of San Diego. May 5, 2021. https://voiceofsandiego.org/2021/05/05/police-drone-footage-is-off-limits-unless-this-legal-challenge-takes flight/ 3 Chula Vista Police Department. "Drone Program." Retrieved April 22, 2022. https://www.chulavistaca.gov/departments/police-department/programs/uas-drone-program 2 Solis, Gustavo. "Chula Vista gives immigration officials, others access to license plate reader data." San Diego Union-Tribune. Dec. 6, 2020. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/communities/south-county/chula-vista/story/2020-12-06/chula-vist a-gives-immigration-officials-others-access-to-license-plate-reader-data 815 Eddy Street, San Francisco, CA 94109 USA phone +l.415.436.9333 fax +l.415.436.9993 email info@eff.org eff.orgWrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 5 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 324 of 810 RE: Surveillance Technology Ordinance April 25, 2022 Page 3 of 3 controls grounded in community input. Such a center would supercharge privacy-invasive surveillance, without commensurate improved oversight. The Task Force has quite the task ahead of you, but by promoting an ordinance that is inclusive of communities and permanently shifts power to elected officials, the city of Chula Vista will be better suited to balance public safety with privacy and civil liberties. Best regards, Dave Maass Director of Investigations Electronic Frontier Foundation 815 Eddy Street, San Francisco, CA 94109 USA phone +l.415.436.9333 fax +l.415.436.9993 email info@eff.org eff.orgWrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 6 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 325 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 7 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 326 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 8 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 327 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 9 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 328 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 10 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 329 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 11 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 330 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 12 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 331 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 13 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 332 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 14 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 333 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 15 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 334 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 16 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 335 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 17 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 336 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 18 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 337 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 19 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 338 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 20 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 339 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 21 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 340 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 22 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 341 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 23 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 342 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 24 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 343 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 25 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 344 of 810 Appendix C: Public Disclosure and Review Process Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 26 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 345 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 27 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 346 of 810 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 28 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 347 of 810 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 29 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 348 of 810 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 30 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 349 of 810 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 31 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 350 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Jeremy Ogul Sent:Monday, August 1, 2022 1:14 PM To:Jeremy Ogul Subject:FW: Privacy meetings From: Jorge Marroquin <> Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2022 1:50 PM To: Adrianna Hernandez <adhernandez@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Privacy meetings I was unable to attend the meeting due to other commitments but I feel you can't be safe without any type of surveillance equipment, why are residents buying home protection equipment alarms or cameras. If you have some problems with privacy stay home but if you have nothing to hide. Enjoy the extra protection,, this is not big brother this is our elected government protecting all of us. I am a retired MTS rail (trolley) accident investigator and at present all public agencies require some type of surveillance equipment to locate and evidence of the 5% of criminals in our communities. Present, timed out member of the Chula Vista safety commision.from the all new AOL app for Android Warning: External Email Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 32 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 351 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Margaret Baker < Sent:Monday, August 1, 2022 1:20 PM To:Privacy Task Force Cc:Sophia Rodriguez Subject:Community's proposed ordinances Attachments:Revised Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance_2022-07-15.pdf; Revised Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance_2022-07-15.pdf Dear Privacy Task Force members, I am writing to make sure you each have copies of the ATTACHED community’s proposed ordinances, and to request that these two documents be posted as attachments for tonight’s Task Force meeting so that the general public can access them. In addition, I am including the link to our group's PPT presentation that provides a clear outline of some of the major provisions of these ordinances, specifically, community-led oversight commission, and elements of the Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Usage Policy. We hope that you will carefully review these provisions during your deliberations. As you know, our community groups have worked diligently to research best practices, discuss options with local community members as well as leaders in cities that have already implemented such ordinances regarding what is needed and what works to protect our privacy. All agree that a community-led process is essential. We feel the city needs to establish BOTH a community-led Privacy Advisory Commission and a Usage Ordinance that establishes processes to codify clear usage policies for each type of surveillance, and to lay out processes for initial and ongoing review of impact and privacy protections, as well as regular reporting that includes provisions for robust community review and comment. We encourage you to start with some basic agreements on definitions, a set of guiding principles, and an outline of components of policy provisions before jumping to votes on details that require more research and consultation. The definitions and provisions included in the Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance will help you to establish a common language. Finally, I would like to thank you for your time and commitment to this challenging work, and to encourage you to continue to ask tough questions and to bring in concerns of often-marginalized members of our community about the need for enforceable, transparent civil rights protections in our city. Sincerely, Margaret A. Baker, DrPH South Bay People Power promotes social justice through nonpartisan civic engagement. Warning: External Email Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 33 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 352 of 810 Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance Revised - July 15, 2022) ORDINANCE NO. _________________ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CHULA VISTA PRIVACY ADVISORY COMMISSION PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS THEREOF, AND DEFINING THE DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF SAID COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council (City Council) finds that the use of surveillance technology is important to protect public health and safety, but such use must be appropriately monitored and regulated to protect the privacy and other rights of Chula Vista residents and visitors, and WHEREAS the City of Chula Vista (the City) has been building on a detailed Smart City Strategic Action Plan since 2017 with limited opportunity for community input, oversight or control; and WHEREAS Chula Vista seeks to maintain its designation by Welcoming America as a certified Welcoming City, City Council strives to comply with the criteria in the Welcoming Standard, in particular, relevant criteria relating to “Safe Communities”, “Equitable Access”, and Civic Engagement”; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the use of open data associated with surveillance technology offers benefits to the City, but those benefits must also be weighed against the costs, both fiscal and civil liberties; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that surveillance technology may be a valuable tool to support community safety, investigations, and prosecution of crimes, but must be balanced with the individual’s right to privacy, it also; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that privacy is not just a personal matter; there are societal consequences to privacy degradation over time as well as societal benefits with increased trust and transparency; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing non-public places or information, but also may include technology that aggregates publicly-available information, which, in the aggregate or when 1 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 34 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 353 of 810 pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal details about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or intimate associations; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that government surveillance may chill associational and expressive freedoms; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that data from surveillance technology can be used to intimidate and oppress certain groups more than others, including those that are defined by a common race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, income level, sexual orientation, or political perspective; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that safeguards, including robust transparency, oversight, and accountability measures, must be in place to protect civil rights and civil liberties before City surveillance technology is deployed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that decisions regarding if and how the City’s surveillance technologies should be funded, acquired, or used should include meaningful public input; and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, City Council unanimously approved creation of a Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force” to draft policy and recommendations to be presented to the City Council for consideration, and further requested that the City Administration prepare a “Citywide Technology Oversight Policy”; and WHEREAS, the said Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force recommends creation of a new permanent citizen advisory board known as the “Privacy Advisory Commision” to advise the Mayor and City Council on transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and usage of surveillance technology and data; and WHEREAS, Article VI, Section 600 of the City Charter reserves to the City Council the authority to create boards and commissions by ordinance, and to prescribe their function, powers, duties, membership, appointment, terms, qualifications, eligibility, reimbursements for expenses, if any; NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: Section I. Establishment A.Establishment and Appropriations Pursuant to Article VI of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista, there is hereby created a Chula Vista Privacy Advisory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Privacy Commission” or “Commission”). Appropriations of funds sufficient for the efficient and proper functioning of the Privacy Commission shall be included in the annual budget by the City Council. 2 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 35 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 354 of 810 B.Purpose and Intent It is the purpose and intent of the City Council to establish a Privacy Commission to serve as an advisory body to the Mayor and City Council on policies and issues related to privacy and surveillance. The Commission will provide advice intended to ensure transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. C.Definitions For purposes of this ordinance, all words defined in the CVMC Chapter XXXX, known as the Chula Vista Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance, have the same meaning herein. D.Membership The Privacy Advisory Commission shall consist of nine (9) members, who shall serve without compensation. At least six (6) members shall be Chula Vista residents. Members shall be appointed by the City Council. E.Qualifications of Members All members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall be persons who have a demonstrated interest in privacy rights through work experience, civic participation, and/or political advocacy. The City Council shall appoint the nine (9) members from the following representative areas of organization interest, expertise, and background: 1.At least one attorney or legal scholar with expertise in privacy or civil rights, or a representative of an organization with expertise in privacy or civil rights; 2.One auditor or certified public accountant; 3.One computer hardware, software, or encryption security professional; 4.One member of an organization that focuses on open government and transparency or an individual, such as a university researcher, with experience working on open government and transparency; and 5.At least four (4) members from equity-focused organizations serving or protecting the rights of communities and groups historically subject to disproportionate surveillance, including communities of color, immigrant communities, religious minorities, and groups concerned with privacy and protest. Member qualifications and eligibility shall be in accordance with Chula Vista Charter Article VI, Section 602, and CVCM Section 2.25.030. No member shall have a state law-prohibited financial interest, employment, or policy-making position in any commercial or for-profit facility, research center, or other organization that sells data products, surveillance equipment, or otherwise profits from recommendations made by the Privacy Advisory Commission. F.Terms 3 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 36 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 355 of 810 Pursuant to Article VI, Section 602 of the City Charter, members shall be appointed by motion of the City Council adopted by at least three affirmative votes. The members thereof shall serve for a term of four (4) years and until their respective successors are appointed and confirmed. Members shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) consecutive terms and an interval of two (2) years must pass before a person who has served two (2) consecutive terms may be reappointed to the body upon which the member had served. Initial members shall be appointed in staggered terms by lot. For the initial appointments, three (3) members shall be appointed to an initial term that will expire on June 30, 2023, and two (2) members shall be appointed to an initial term that will expire on June 30 of each subsequent year. Initial appointments to a term of two years or less shall not have the initial term count for purposes of the eight-year term limit. G.Rules The Commission shall hold regular meetings as required by ordinance of the City Council, and such special meetings as such commissions may require. All proceedings shall be open to the public. At the first regular meeting, and subsequently at the first regular meeting of each year following the first day of July of every year, members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall select a chairperson and a vice chairperson. The Commission shall adopt rules for the government of its business and procedures in compliance with the law. The Commission rules shall provide that a quorum of the Privacy Advisory Commission is five people. Pursuant to Article VI, Section 603 of the City Charter, the Commission shall have the same power as the City Council to compel the attendance of witnesses, to examine them under oath and to compel the production of evidence before it. Section II. Privacy Advisory Commission: Duties and Functions A.Duties and Functions The Privacy Advisory Commission shall: 1.Provide advice and technical assistance to the City on best practices to protect resident and visitor privacy rights in connection with the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. 2.Conduct meetings and use other public forums to collect and receive public input on the above subject matter. 3.Review Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies for all existing and new surveillance technology and make recommendations prior to the City seeking solicitation of funds and proposals for surveillance technology. 4.Submit annual reports and recommendations to the City Council regarding: 4 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 37 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 356 of 810 a.The City’s use of surveillance technology; and b.Whether new City surveillance technology privacy and data retention policies should be developed, or existing policies should be amended. c.Provide analysis to the City Council of pending federal, state, and local legislation relevant to the City’s purchase and/or use of surveillance technology. d.The Privacy Advisory Commission shall make reports, findings, and recommendations either to the City Manager or the City Council, as appropriate. The Commission shall present an annual written report to the City Council. The Commission may submit recommendations to the City Council following submission to the City Manager. B.Meetings and Voting The Commission shall meet at an established regular interval, day of the week, time, and location suitable for its purpose. Such meetings shall be designated regular meetings. Other meetings scheduled for a time or place other than the regular day, time and location shall be designated special meetings. Written notice of special meetings shall be provided to the Commission members, and all meetings of the Commission shall comport with any City or State open meetings laws, policies, or obligations. The Commission shall, in consultation with the City Manager, establish bylaws, rules and procedures for the conduct of its business by a majority vote of the members present. Voting shall be required for the adoption of any motion or resolution. Any action by the Commission shall be approved by a majority of members present, provided a quorum exists. C.Staff Staff assistance may be provided to the Board as determined by the City Manager, pursuant to his or her authority under the Charter to administer all affairs of the City under his or her jurisdiction. Section III. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. 5 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 38 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 357 of 810 Section IV. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section V. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. Section VI. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by:Approved as to form by Maria Kachadoorian Glen R. Googins City Manager City Attorney 6 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 39 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 358 of 810 Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance Revised - July 15, 2022) ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER XXXX TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING RULES FOR THE CITY’S ACQUISITION AND USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista (“City”) takes great public pride in its status as a Welcoming City and as a Smart City; and WHEREAS, smart public safety decisions and the protection of all community members require that municipalities ensure public debate and community involvement in decisions about whether to acquire or use surveillance technology; moreover, that real public safety requires that residents have a voice in these decisions; and WHEREAS, across the U.S. cities that have adhered to a “privacy bill of rights” approach are able to win public support in implementing the technology with proper safeguards in place to build trust. Alternatively, cities that implement new technology in secrecy, without oversight, without policy, and without broad and inclusive public input have found themselves facing scrutiny, lawsuits, and voter referendums to ban certain technologies. WHEREAS, the City Council finds it is essential to have an informed public debate as early as possible about decisions related to the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, while the use of surveillance technology may threaten the privacy of all citizens, throughout history, surveillance efforts have been used to intimidate and oppress certain communities and groups more than others, including those that are defined by a common race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, income level, sexual orientation or political perspective; and WHEREAS, while acknowledging the significance of protecting the privacy of citizens, the City Council finds that surveillance technology may also be a valuable tool to bolster community safety and aid in the investigation and prosecution of crimes; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing non-public places or information (such as wiretaps) but also may include technology which aggregates publicly available information, because such information, in the aggregate or when pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal a wealth of detail about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or sexual associations; and 1 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 40 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 359 of 810 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that no decisions relating to the City’s use of surveillance technology should occur without strong consideration being given to the impact such technologies may have on civil rights and civil liberties, including those rights guaranteed by the California and United States Constitutions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that any and all decisions regarding if and how the City’s surveillance technologies should be funded, acquired, or used should include meaningful public input and that public opinion should be given significant weight in policy decisions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that legally enforceable safeguards, including robust transparency, oversight, and accountability measures, must be in place to protect civil rights and civil liberties before any City surveillance technology is deployed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that if a surveillance technology is approved, data reporting measures must be adopted that empower the City Council and public to verify that mandated civil rights and civil liberties safeguards have been strictly adhered to. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: Section I. Establishment A.This Ordinance shall be known as the Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance. B.Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter XXXX,is hereby added as set forth below: Chapter XXXX. REGULATIONS ON CITY’S ACQUISITION AND USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY C.Definitions 1.“Annual Surveillance Report” means a written report concerning a specific surveillance technology that includes all the following: a.A description of how the surveillance technology was used, including the type and quantity of data gathered or analyzed by the technology; b.Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the surveillance technology was shared with internal or external entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed, under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the disclosure(s) except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; c.Where applicable, a description of the physical objects to which the surveillance technology hardware was installed without revealing the specific location of such 2 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 41 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 360 of 810 hardware; for surveillance technology software, a breakdown of what data sources the surveillance technology was applied to; d.Where applicable, a description of where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically, by each Police Area in the relevant year; e.A summary of community complaints or concerns about the surveillance technology, and an analysis of its Surveillance Use Policy and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and civil liberties. The analysis shall consider whether, and to what extent, the use of the surveillance technology disproportionately impacts certain groups or individuals; f.The results of any internal audits or investigations relating to surveillance technology, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.To the extent that the public release of such information is prohibited by law, City staff shall provide a confidential report to the City Council regarding this information to the extent allowed by law; g.Information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; h.A general description of all methodologies used to detect incidents of data breaches or unauthorized access, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; I.Information, including crime statistics, that helps the community assess whether the surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified purposes; i.Statistics and information about Public Records Act requests regarding the relevant subject surveillance technology, including response rates, such as the number of Public Records Act requests on such surveillance technology and the open and close date for each of these Public Records Act requests; j.Total annual costs for the surveillance technology,including personnel and other ongoing costs, and what source of funding will fund the surveillance technology in the coming year; and k.Any requested modifications to the Surveillance Use Policy and a detailed basis for the request. 3 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 42 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 361 of 810 2.“City” means any department, unit, program, and/or subordinate division of the City of Chula Vista as provided by Chapter XXXX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 3.“City staff” means City personnel authorized by the City Manager or appropriate City department head to seek City Council Approval of Surveillance Technology in conformance with this Chapter. 4.“Community meeting” means a publicly held meeting that is accessible, noticed at least seventy-two hours in advance in at least two languages, for the purpose of educating communities, answering questions, and learning about potential impacts of surveillance technology on disadvantaged groups. 5.“Continuing agreement” means a written agreement that automatically renews unless terminated by one or more parties. 6.“Exigent circumstances” means a City department’s good faith belief that an emergency involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any individual requires the use of surveillance technology that has not received prior approval by City Council. 7.“Facial recognition technology” means an automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual based on an individual’s face. 8.“Individual” means a natural person. 9.“Personal communication device” means a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant, a wireless capable tablet and a similar wireless two-way communications and/or portable internet-accessing device, whether procured or subsidized by a City entity or personally owned, that is used in the regular course of City business. 10.“Police area” refers to each of the geographic districts assigned to a Chula Vista Police Department captain or commander and as such districts are amended from time to time. 11.“Surveillance” (or “spying”) means to observe or analyze the movements, behavior, data, or actions of individuals. Individuals include those whose identity can be revealed by data or combinations of data, such as license plate data, images, IP addresses, user identifications, unique digital identifiers, or data traces left by the individual. 12.“Surveillance technology” means any software (e.g., scripts, code, Application Programming Interfaces), electronic device, or system utilizing an electronic device used, designed, or primarily intended to observe, collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group. It also includes the product (e.g., audiovisual recording, data, analysis, report) of such surveillance technology. Examples of surveillance technology include, but are not limited to the following: cell site simulators (Stingrays); automated license plate readers; gunshot detectors (ShotSpotter); drone-mounted data collection; 4 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 43 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 362 of 810 facial recognition software; thermal imaging systems; body-worn cameras; social media analytics software; gait analysis software; video cameras that can record audio or video and transmit or be remotely accessed. It also includes software designed to monitor social media services or forecast and/or predict criminal activity or criminality, and biometric identification hardware or software. Surveillance technology” does not include devices, software, or hardware, unless they have been equipped with, or are modified to become or include, a surveillance technology beyond what is set forth below or used beyond a purpose as set forth below: a.Routine office hardware, such as televisions,computers, credit card machines, badge readers, copy machines, and printers, that is in widespread use and will not be used for any public surveillance or law enforcement functions related to the public; b.Parking Ticket Devices (PTDs) used solely for parking enforcement-related purposes, including any sensors embedded in parking sensors to detect the presence of a car in the space; c.Manually-operated, non-wearable, handheld digital cameras, audio recorders, and video recorders that are not designed to be used surreptitiously and whose functionality is limited to manually-capturing and manually-downloading video and/or audio recordings; d.Surveillance devices that cannot record or transmit audio or video or be remotely accessed, such as image stabilizing binoculars or night vision goggles; e.Manually-operated technological devices used primarily for internal municipal entity communications and are not designed to surreptitiously collect surveillance data, such as radios and email systems; f.City databases that do not contain any data or other information collected, captured, recorded, retained, processed, intercepted, or analyzed by surveillance technology, including payroll, accounting, or other fiscal databases; g.Medical equipment used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease or injury, provided that any information obtained from this equipment is used solely for medical purposes; h.Police department interview room cameras; i.City department case management systems; j.Personal Communication Devices that have not been modified beyond stock manufacturer capabilities in a manner described above; 5 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 44 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 363 of 810 k.Surveillance technology used by the City solely to monitor and conduct internal investigations involving City employees, contractors, and volunteers; and, l.Systems, software, databases, and data sources used for revenue collection on behalf of the City by the City Treasurer, provided that no information from these sources is shared by the City Treasurer with any other City department or third-party except as part of efforts to collect revenue that is owed to the City. 14. “Surveillance Impact Report” means a publicly-posted written report including, at a minimum, the following: a.Description: Information describing the surveillance technology and how it works, including product descriptions from manufacturers; b.Purpose: Information on the proposed purposes(s) for the surveillance technology; c.Location: The physical or virtual location(s)it may be deployed, using general descriptive terms, and crime statistics for any location(s); d.Impact: An assessment of the Surveillance Use Policy for the particular technology and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and liberties and whether the surveillance technology was used or deployed, intentionally or inadvertently, in a manner that may disproportionately affect marginalized communities; e.Mitigations: Identify specific, affirmative technical and procedural measures that will be implemented to safeguard the public from each identified impact; f.Data Types and Sources: A list of all types and sources of data to be collected, analyzed, or processed by the surveillance technology, including open source data, scores, reports, logic or algorithm used, and any additional information derived therefrom; g.Data Security: Information about the controls that will be designed and implemented to ensure that adequate security objectives are achieved to safeguard the data collected or generated by the surveillance technology from unauthorized access or disclosure; h.Fiscal Costs and Sources: The forecasted, prior, and ongoing fiscal costs for the surveillance technology, including initial purchase, personnel, and other ongoing costs, and any past, current or potential sources of funding; 6 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 45 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 364 of 810 i.Third-Party Dependence: Whether use or maintenance of the surveillance technology will require data gathered by the surveillance technology to be handled or stored by a third-party vendor at any time; j.Alternatives: A summary of all alternative methods (whether involving the use of a new technology or not) considered before deciding to use the proposed surveillance technology, including the costs and benefits associated with each alternative and an explanation of the reasons why each alternative is inadequate; k.Track Record: A summary of the experience (if any) other entities, especially government entities, have had with the proposed technology, including, if available, quantitative information about the effectiveness of the proposed surveillance technology in achieving its stated purpose in other jurisdictions, and any known adverse information about the surveillance technology such as unanticipated costs, failures, or civil rights and civil liberties abuses, existing publicly reported controversies, and any court rulings in favor or in opposition to the surveillance; and l.Public engagement and comments: A description of any community engagement held and any future community engagement plans, number of attendees, a compilation of all comments received and City departmental responses given, and City departmental conclusions about potential neighborhood impacts and how such impacts may differ as it pertains to different segments of the community that may result from the acquisition of surveillance technology. 15. "Surveillance Use Policy" means a publicly-released and legally-enforceable policy for use of the surveillance technology that at a minimum specifies the following: a.Purpose: The specific purpose(s) that the surveillance technology is intended to advance; b.Use: The specific uses that are authorized, and the rules and processes required prior to such use; c.Data Collection: The information that can be collected, captured, recorded, intercepted, or retained by the surveillance technology, as well as data that might be inadvertently collected during the authorized uses of the surveillance technology and what measures will be taken to minimize and delete such data. Where applicable, any data sources the surveillance technology will rely upon, including open source data, should be listed; 7 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 46 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 365 of 810 d.Data Access: The job classification of individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the rules and processes required prior to access or use of the information; e.Data Protection: The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access, including logging, encryption, and access control mechanisms; f.Data Retention: The time period, if any, for which information collected by the surveillance technology will be routinely retained, the reason such retention period is appropriate to further the purpose(s), the process by which the information is regularly deleted after that period lapses, and the specific conditions that must be met to retain information beyond that period; g.Public Access: A description of how collected information can be accessed or used by members of the public, including criminal defendants; h.Third Party Data Sharing: If and how information obtained from the surveillance technology can be used or accessed, including any required justification or legal standard necessary to do so and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information; i.Training: The training required for any individual authorized to use the surveillance technology or to access information collected by the surveillance technology; j.Auditing and Oversight: The procedures used to ensure that the Surveillance Use Policy is followed, including internal personnel assigned to ensure compliance with the policy, internal recordkeeping of the use of the surveillance technology or access to information collected by the surveillance technology, technical measures to monitor for misuse, any independent person or entity with oversight authority, and the legally enforceable sanctions for violations of the policy; and k.Maintenance: The procedures used to ensure that the security and integrity of the surveillance technology and collected information will be maintained. Section II. Privacy Advisory Commission Commission”) Notification and Review Requirements A.Commission Notification Required Prior to City Solicitation of Funds and Proposals for Surveillance Technology. 1. City staff shall notify the Chair of the Commission by written memorandum along with providing a Surveillance Use Policy and a Surveillance Impact Report prior to: 8 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 47 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 366 of 810 a.Seeking or soliciting funds for surveillance technology, including but not limited to applying for a grant; b.Soliciting proposals with any entity to acquire, share or otherwise use surveillance technology including the information it provides; or c. Formally or informally facilitating in a meaningful way or implementing surveillance technology in collaboration with other entities, including City ones. 2. Upon notification by City staff, the Chair of the Commission shall place the item on the agenda at the next Commission meeting for discussion and possible action. At this meeting, City staff shall present the Commission with evidence of the need for the funds or equipment, or shall otherwise justify the action City staff will seek Council approval for pursuant to Section III. 3. The Commission may make a recommendation to the City Council by voting for approval to proceed, by objecting to the proposal, by recommending that the City staff modify the proposal, or by taking no action. 4. If the Commission votes to approve, object, or modify the proposal, City staff may proceed and seek City Council approval of the proposed surveillance technology initiative pursuant to the requirements of Section III. City staff shall present to City Council the result of the Commission’s review, including any objections to the proposal. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on the item within 90 calendar days of notification to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed and seek City Council approval of the proposed Surveillance Technology initiative pursuant to the requirements of Section II. B.Commission Review and Approval Required for New Surveillance Technology Before City Council Approval 1. Prior to seeking City Council approval under Section III, City staff shall submit a Surveillance Impact Report and a Surveillance Use Policy for the proposed new surveillance technology initiative to the Commission for its review at a publicly noticed meeting. The Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy must address the specific subject matter specified for each document as set forth in Section I. 2. The Commission shall approve, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. If the Commission proposes that the Surveillance Use Policy be modified, the Commission shall propose such modifications to City staff. City staff shall present such modifications to the Commission for approval before seeking City Council approval under Section III. 3. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report, City staff shall complete one or more community meetings in each City Council district where the proposed surveillance 9 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 48 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 367 of 810 technology is deployed, with opportunity for public comment and written response. The City Council may condition its approval of the proposed surveillance technology on City staff conducting additional community engagement before approval, or after approval as a condition of approval. 4. The Commission shall recommend that the City Council adopt, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. If the Commission proposes that the Surveillance Use Policy be modified, the Commission shall propose such modifications to City staff. City staff shall present such modifications to City Council when seeking City Council approval under Section III. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on a presented item within 90 days of notification to the Commission Chair pursuant to Section II, City staff may seek City Council approval of the item. 6. City staff seeking City Council approval shall schedule for City Council consideration and approval of the proposed Surveillance Use Policy, and include Commission recommendations, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a mandatory, properly noticed, germane public hearing. Approval may only occur at a public hearing. C.Commission Review Requirements for Existing Surveillance Technology Before Seeking City Council Approval 1. Prior to seeking City Council approval for existing City surveillance technology used by the City under Section III, City staff shall submit a Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy for each existing surveillance technology to the Commission for its review, and for the public’s review, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a publicly noticed meeting, so the public can prepare for and participate in the Commission meetings. The Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy shall address the specific subject matters set forth for each document in Section I. 2. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report, City staff shall complete one or more community meetings in each City Council district where the proposed surveillance technology is deployed with opportunity for public comment and written response. The City Council may condition its approval on City staff conducting additional outreach before approval, or after approval as a condition of approval. 3. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance Use Policy as described above, City staff shall present to the Commission, and for public review, a list of all surveillance technology possessed and/or used by the City. 4. The Commission shall rank the surveillance technology items in order of potential impact to civil liberties to provide a recommended sequence for items to be heard at Commission meetings. The Commission shall take into consideration input from City 10 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 49 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 368 of 810 staff on the operational importance of the surveillance technology in determining the ranking to allow such matters to be heard in a timely manner. 5. Within sixty (60) days of the Commission’s action in Section II(C)(4), and continuing every month thereafter until a Surveillance Impact Report and a Surveillance Use Policy have been submitted for each item of the list, City staff shall submit at least one (1) Surveillance Impact Report and one (1) proposed Surveillance Use Policy per month to the Commission for review, generally beginning with the highest ranking surveillance technology items as determined by the Commission. 6. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on any item within 90 days of submission to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed to the City Council for approval of the item pursuant to Section III. Section III. City Council Approval Requirements for New and Existing Surveillance Technology A. City staff shall obtain City Council approval prior to any of the following: 1. Accepting local, state, or federal funds, or in-kind or other donations for surveillance technology; x2. Acquiring new surveillance technology, including but not limited to procuring such technology without the exchange of monies or consideration; 3. Using existing surveillance technology, or using new surveillance technology, including the information the surveillance technology provides, for a purpose, in a manner, or in a location not previously approved by the City Council pursuant to the requirements of this ordinance; or 4. Entering into a continuing agreement or written agreement with to acquire, share or otherwise use surveillance technology or the information it provides, including data-sharing agreements. 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, nothing herein shall be construed to prevent, restrict or interfere with any person providing evidence or information derived from surveillance technology to a law enforcement agency for the purposes of conducting a criminal investigation or the law enforcement agency from receiving such evidence or information. B.City Council Approval Process 1. After the Commission notification and review requirements in Section II have been met, City staff seeking City Council approval shall schedule a date for City Council consideration of the proposed Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance 11 Appendix D: Sample Ordinances Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 50 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 369 of 810 Use Policy, and include Commission recommendations, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a mandatory, properly-noticed, germane public hearing. Approval may only occur at a public hearing. 2. The City Council shall only approve any action as provided in this Chapter after first considering the recommendation of the Commission, and subsequently making a determination that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology outweigh the costs; that the proposal will safeguard civil liberties and civil rights; and that, in the City Council’s judgment, no alternative with a lesser economic cost or impact on civil rights or civil liberties would be as effective. 3. For Approval of existing surveillance technology for which the Commission does not make its recommendation within ninety (90) days of review as provided for in Section II: if the City Council has not reviewed and approved such item within four (4) City Council meetings from when the item was initially scheduled for City Council consideration, the City shall cease its use of the surveillance technology until such review and approval occurs. C.Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies as Public Records 1.Unless otherwise provided in this Ordinance, Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies are public records. 2.City staff shall make all Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies, as updated from time to time, available to the public as long as the City uses the surveillance technology in accordance with its request pursuant to Section II. 3.City staff shall post all Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies to the City’s website with an indication of its current approval status and the planned City Council date for action. Section IV.Use of Unapproved Surveillance Technology during Exigent Circumstances A. City staff may temporarily acquire or use surveillance technology and the data derived from that use in a manner not expressly allowed by a Surveillance Use Policy only in a situation involving exigent circumstances. B. If City staff acquires or uses a surveillance technology in a situation involving exigent circumstances, City staff shall: 1.Immediately report in writing the use of the surveillance technology and its justifications to the City Council and the Commission; 2.Use the surveillance technology solely to respond to the exigent circumstances; 3.Cease using the surveillance technology when the exigent circumstances end; 12WrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 51 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 370 of 810 4.Only keep and maintain data related to the exigent circumstances and dispose of any data that is not relevant to an ongoing investigation or the exigent circumstances; and 5.Following the end of the exigent circumstances, report the temporary acquisition or use of the surveillance technology for exigent circumstances to the Commission in accordance with Section II of this ordinance at its next meeting for discussion and possible recommendation to the City Council. C. Any surveillance technology acquired in accordance with exigent circumstances shall be returned within thirty (30) calendar days following when the exigent circumstances end, unless City staff initiates the process set forth for the use of the surveillance technology by submitting a Surveillance Use Policy and Surveillance Impact Report for Commission review within this 30-day time period. If City staff is unable to meet the 30-day deadline, City staff shall notify the City Council, who may grant an extension. In the event that City staff complies with the 30-day deadline or the deadline as may be extended by the City Council, City staff may retain possession of the surveillance technology, but may only use such surveillance technology consistent with the requirements of this Ordinance. Section V. Oversight Following City Council Approval A.Annual Surveillance Report 1. For each approved surveillance technology item, City staff shall present a written Annual Surveillance Report for the Commission to review within one year after the date of City Council final passage of such surveillance technology and annually thereafter as long as the surveillance technology is used. 2. If City staff is unable to meet the annual deadline, City staff shall notify the Commission in writing of staff’s request to extend this period, and the reasons for that request. The Commission may grant a single extension of up to sixty (60) calendar days to comply with this provision. 3. After review of the Annual Surveillance Report by the Commission, City staff shall submit the Report to the City Council. 4. The Commission shall recommend to the City Council: (a) that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology in question outweigh the costs and that civil liberties and civil rights are safeguarded; (b) that use of the surveillance technology cease; or (c) propose modifications to the corresponding Surveillance Use Policy that will resolve any identified concerns. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on the item within 90 calendar days of submission of the Annual Surveillance Report to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed to the City Council for approval of the Annual Surveillance Report. B.Summary Of All Requests And Recommendations And City Council Determination 13WrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 52 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 371 of 810 1. In addition to the above submission of any Annual Surveillance Report, City staff shall provide in its report to the City Council a summary of all requests for City Council approval pursuant to Section III for that particular surveillance technology and the pertinent Commission recommendation, including whether the City Council approved or rejected the proposal and/or required changes to a proposed Surveillance Use Policy before approval. 2. Based upon information provided in the Annual Surveillance Report and after considering the recommendation of the Commission, the City Council shall revisit its cost benefit” analysis as provided in Section III(B)(2) and either uphold or set aside the previous determination. Should the City Council set aside its previous determination, the City’s use of the surveillance technology must cease. Alternatively, City Council may require modifications to a particular Surveillance Use Policy that will resolve any concerns with the use of a particular surveillance technology. Section VI. Enforcement A.Violations of this article are subject to the following remedies: 1. Any material violation of this Ordinance, or of a Surveillance Use Policy promulgated pursuant to this Ordinance, constitutes an injury and any person may institute proceedings for injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or writ of mandate in the Superior Court of the State of California to enforce this Ordinance. An action instituted under this paragraph shall be brought against the City of Chula Vista and, if necessary, to effectuate compliance with this Ordinance or a Surveillance Use Policy (including to expunge information unlawfully collected, retained, or shared thereunder), any other governmental agency with possession, custody, or control of data subject to this Ordinance, to the extent permitted by law. 2. Any person who has been subjected to the use of surveillance technology in material violation of this Ordinance, or of a material violation of a Surveillance Use Policy, or about whom information has been obtained, retained, accessed, shared, or used in violation of this Ordinance or of a Surveillance Use Policy promulgated under this Ordinance, may institute proceedings in the Superior Court of the State of California against the City of Chula Vista and shall be entitled to recover actual damages (but not less than liquidated damages of $1,000 or $100 per day for each day of violation, whichever is greater). 3. A court may award costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the plaintiff who is the prevailing party in an action brought under paragraphs A(1) and A(2) under Section VI above. 14WrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 53 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 372 of 810 Section VII. Contract for Surveillance Technology A.Contracts and agreements for surveillance technology 1.It shall be unlawful for the City to enter into any contract or other agreement for surveillance technology that conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance. Any conflicting provisions in any such contract or agreements, including but not limited to non-disclosure agreements, shall be deemed void and legally unenforceable. Any amendment or exercise of any option to any contract to obtain or use surveillance technology shall require City staff to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. 2.To the extent permitted by law, the City shall publicly disclose all of its surveillance contracts, including any and all related non-disclosure agreements, if any, regardless of any contract terms to the contrary. Section VIII. Whistleblower Protections A. Neither the City nor anyone acting on behalf of the City may take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant for employment, including but not limited to discriminating with respect to compensation, terms and conditions of employment, access to information, restrictions on due process rights, or civil or criminal liability, because: 1.The employee or applicant was perceived to, about to, or assisted in any lawful disclosure of information concerning the funding, acquisition, or use of a surveillance technology or surveillance data based upon a good faith belief that the disclosure evidenced a violation of this Ordinance; or 2.The employee or applicant was perceived to, about to, had assisted in or had participated in any proceeding or action to carry out the purposes of this Ordinance. B. It shall be grounds for disciplinary action for a City employee or anyone else acting on behalf of the City to retaliate against another City employee or applicant who makes a good-faith complaint that there has been a failure to comply with any Surveillance Use Policy or administrative instruction promulgated under this Ordinance. C. Any employee or applicant who is injured by a violation of this Section may institute a proceeding for monetary damages and injunctive relief against the City in any court of competent jurisdiction. 15WrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 54 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 373 of 810 Section IX. Review of Existing Surveillance Use Policies and Adoption as Ordinances A. Surveillance technology is considered existing if the City possessed, used, or has a contract in force and effect for the use of surveillance technology, or any resulting data, on the effective date of this Ordinance. B. The requirement for City staff to present a list of all existing surveillance technology and, once ranked, to seek monthly Commission review and approval for the use of existing surveillance technology shall begin within sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Ordinance. C. As per Section II, City staff shall return to City Council with an ordinance or ordinances for adoption and codification under the Chula Vista Municipal Code of all Surveillance Use Policies, but only after proper Commission and City Council review of any Surveillance Use Policies for existing surveillance technology, and with a 15-day public notice period in each instance to allow the public to prepare and participate in the meetings. Section X. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. Section XI. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section XII. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. 16WrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 55 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 374 of 810 Section XIII. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by Maria Kachadoorian Glen R Googins City Manager City Attorney 17WrittencommentsreceivedbyTaskForce4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 56 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 375 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Michael McDonald < > Sent:Monday, August 1, 2022 1:21 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:7/27 Community Meeting - Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Dear Task Force members, I attended the community forum on July 27, 2022 and would like to provide my feedback about the meeting for your attention and the record. I was in Raf's (Rafael?) group and takeaways were as follows: 1. Most of the conversation was dominated by one person in particular who claimed he had prior experience with Chula Vista government and politics. He traded a lot of questions and remarks with the moderator and it appeared that Raf was in a defensive position the whole time instead of taking notes and facilitating a discussion. I'm not sure if there was an overall plan for the discussion groups prior to this meeting, but I did not feel the conversation was productive for all of us and I felt some members did not have a chance to voice their opinions, ideas and experiences. Please be mindful of individuals dominating the conversation and guide the conversation and take notes rather than taking any position that could be perceived as bias towards the City or the police department and allow others to share as well. 2. Based on the results of the survey in the beginning of the meeting, the majority of the attendants were over 40 years of age and were either white or white presenting. This was not representative of the population of Chula Vista or the demographics of the communities where these technologies are used the most. This was apparent in our discussion as all members of my group were concerned with issues surrounding personal property, which limited the scope and reach of these technologies and the broader issues relating to the communities that are most impacted, the unhoused in Chula Vista, young people in underserved communities and so forth. Without adequate representation of residents of Chula Vista at these meetings, including those that were formerly incarcerated, young people of color and those that are most impacted by the use of surveillance technologies is a disservice to this Task Force and will produce inaccurate data that is collected for the purpose of policy making. 3. This leads to my next not which is the discussion question about how to get more people to attend the meetings. As I'm aware, the City may already employ a marketing/PR team that could contract with a consultant or hire more people to figure out ways to attract and incentivize more people, especially from the communities where this technology is most deployed, to attend the meetings. This could mean being more transparent about how this technology is used, how many drones the PD currently deploys to neighborhoods and what is done with the data collected. There could be an outreach team visiting local junior and high schools to talk with students or attend after school programs in the area. These ideas were not discussed because the conversation was only regarding what has already been done and doing more of that ex. sending mailers to homes. I was disappointed that the moderator only shared this idea to the rest of the attendants at the end and not the majority of the conversation about confusion and concerns the group members had. 4. Finally, our group although limited in focus on personal privacy concerns did offer valid questions about past events about how this contract was approved, current data collection and management processes and future use of these technologies. The moderator appeared to take the position of representing the City by trying to answer questions about the contract, police protocols and data collection practices and the policy proposals they came up with. I expected the moderator to ask the questions and take notes about what questions and concerns that were raised. As soon as he tried to answer the initial questions about the contract, the group Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 57 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 376 of 810 2 assumed that he represented the City and continued to ask questions and this was not a productive conversation. Thank you for your time and attention to my feedback. I hope to participate in future meetings and events surrounding this topic. Best, Michael McDonald Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 58 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 377 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Stacey Uy Sent:Monday, August 1, 2022 9:46 AM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Takeaways from 7/27 Public Comment Forum Dear Privacy Task Force Members, Thank you for carving out a space for the community to contribute to the conversation on surveillance in Chula Vista. As a member of Adriana's group, I wanted to make sure highlights from our group were put into the record. We had a great discussion. We probably disagreed on many things, but we were in consensus over the following points, and especially for surveillance policies being community-led. 1. Seeking public approval after programs are already underway is TOO LATE. The fact that the drone program and automated LPRs are already being used without the public's consent and knowledge is a sign that the city of Chula Vista is failing to protect its citizens' privacy. There needs to be processes in place before technology is acquired and used. 2. One of our group members, Sergio, spoke of his personal experience of being overly surveilled, to the point where even his daughter is noticing the drones following them and he's had to file complaints to the DOJ with no response. Safeguards like the Oversight Board and policy safeguards need to be community-led. That means, placing the people affected by surveillance the most on the Oversight Board. People like Sergio, Black, Latinx, undocumented, young people, trans and queer folks should be sought after as experts on how surveillance affects our everyday lives and how we can protect privacy while keeping each other safe. Requirements for membership that include bachelor's degrees, clean records, and technology "expertise" are back door attempts to exclude the people who have first hand experience of being overly surveilled in the city. 3. We all identified issues in Chula Vista that needed attention such as homelessness, drug rehabilitation programs, and affordable housing. We ALL agreed the return on investment from surveillance technology to supposedly prevent crime was unacceptable, compared to how that money could have been spent actually helping the people that need it the most. Providing basic services is where crime prevention happens. 4. According to our poll, no one under the age of 24 was present. The city of Chula Vista needs to be actively engaging young people in the conversation, as these policies will affect them for the rest of their lives. That can look like holding youth-specific forums at schools and publicizing meetings on Tik Tok and IG. If you don't know how to do these things, you should hire (and pay) young people to help you. As an Asian American, I was also very concerned that the forum audience did not reflect the racial makeup of the city. With the spotlight on anti-Asian violence, people claim we need surveillance to keep us safe, and I disagree. We are just as much at risk of being overly-surveilled and over-policed, and we will not be used as a racial wedge to build more surveillance in the city. Please do a better job of engaging with Black, Latinx, and Asian American communities for these meetings. Thank you for your attention on this matter. And I hope to engage more in future meetings. Sincerely, Stacey Uy (she/hers) Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 59 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 378 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Norah Shultz < Sent:Friday, August 12, 2022 7:12 AM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Concerns about survey conducted for policy consideration Dear Members of the Chula Vista Privacy Advisory Task Force, I am a Professor of Sociology at San Diego State University. I have been a professor and a senior administrator in higher education for over thirty years. Since my undergraduate days, one of my core specializations has been in the area of survey research. I’ve reviewed the report and the survey and I have a lot of questions. I’m going to write about them in groups and put representative examples for the types of concerns, rather than go through each question and/or finding. My overall concern is that while this is a well-known firm that has conducted a classic phone/email survey with traditional methodology (and for that there are strengths to what they have presented), it is not getting to the answers that are needed for the questions that a city council should be seeking. What is needed is a study to determine the needs and concerns of all community members, which is different from a study to determine the likelihood of something occurring – a market research study or a political poll, for example. In other words, a more nuanced study and analysis is required for a study of community needs and concerns. I’m sure the firm can answer a few questions I have about their work, however, as I explained I will list the overall issues with their approach: 1) It is very reassuring to read the words random sample and statistically significant. This sounds scientific and unbiased. However, a truly random sample is one in which every person has the same chance as any other person to participate in the survey. That means every person in your population – the group you are interested in learning about. I’m assuming that you are all interested in learning about all the residents of Chula Vista. So if this were truly a random sample of the residents of Chula Vista, then that means that each person in Chula Vista had the same chance of ending up in the final group as any other. But this is not true because of the following: a. The sample was originally constructed from a list. Unless that list was all of the residents (over 18) of Chula Vista, then not everyone has the opportunity to be selected. Where is the list from? Phone directories and car registrations? There is bias there. Voter registration? We know the bias there. I didn’t see reported in the materials how the list was generated. b. When you generate your random sample from your list, you decide to select every Xth person depending upon how many you need in your sample as you allude to in your notes on effect size. But again, unless every Xth person agrees to participate and complete the survey, bias has crept in again. Do you know how different the participants are from those who do not participate? One way is to try to get non- participants and those who do not complete the survey to provide some demographic information, particularly on relevant variables such as income, or some indicator of Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 60 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 379 of 810 2 socio-economic status, and ethnic group identity and, in this case, also on perceived knowledge of the technology, so that some comparisons can be made to determine if your final sample is representative of the population and if these changes along the way have not introduced a bias that impacts your study questions. Again, while this check on the representativeness of the sample may be included in the final report, it was hard to find. c. The easiest way to reassure those reviewing the report would be to take the demographic information from p. 2 and on p. 6 and compare it to the data from the Census Bureau for the city. You explain that you applied weights (and only on four variables from what I can discern) but do not provide detail about the demographic characteristics that were impacted. The weighting statistical technique will not account for missing information from groups. The weighting technique also would not impact the open-ended questions. This is an extremely long questionnaire. We have no idea what percentage of the original group actually completed the questionnaire. Even with the weighting, it makes it very difficult to assess many of the findings - particularly when critical policy issues are being considered. 2) The questionnaire is extremely long. This in itself is of concern. People who complete a survey of this length are different from those who don’t. While there are some very good aspects to the questionnaire, there are some that I find concerning, besides the length. For example, let’s look at Q7a. Part of the intro reads, “…where engineers use it to manage traffic signal timing in an effort to improve traffic flow and safety.” It is not surprising that 77% of the respondents approved of this. Who is going to say they don’t approve of improving safety? If a question has an 80/20 split, it is not differentiating. Now it may be that everyone is okay with this, but the question wording makes me wonder. Were there skip sequences? For example, if I don’t know anything about the use of drones, did I answer Q9? After that, Q11 and A12 really start out with sentences that make it pretty hard to answer anything other than beneficial. I actually think it is problematic that those with little or no knowledge seem to be included in the analyses along with those who claim some awareness of the technology or Chula Vista’s programs, as well as others who may have actual experience or understanding of the technology use and privacy issues and implications, beyond what is written in this survey as the lead-ins to the questions. That may be one of the most problematic aspects. It is very good that you include the opposite questions, however the language is subtly different, “Some people worry the drones might,…..” [emphasis mine]. Again, not to throw this out entirely but I think problems with wording and sequencing of questions should be brought to the attention of those who might want to use the reported findings to make policy decisions that impact people’s lives. 3) My last points are about the analysis. The vast number of crosstabs, many with small cell sizes, makes it hard to go back and make any independent judgments. I also did not see any statistical analysis, such as a chi-square, associated with these data. Since chi-square is sensitive to overall sample size and the cell sizes are so variable, a discussion of statistical significance related to this information would, admittedly, be problematic. But there are other ways to address this. You mention sampling error several times in the report, but I haven’t been able to find any discussion of effect size. In a study such as this, one that is impacting policy and citizens lives, I’d be curious about meaningful differences rather than statistically significant differences. I did appreciate the explanation of how to properly read a cross tab! I also reviewed the section discussing the multivariate analysis, but would like to have seen the actual analysis in the appendix and not just the cloud replication. What was the overall R2? Was this explaining the outcome in any significant way? It is, as I stated above, important to discuss the meaning and not just the statistical significance but the findings are presented in a way that makes it hard to understand overall how much is being explained here. Were all responses put into your model? Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 61 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 380 of 810 3 Another key concern is that we don’t know who is really being represented in this analysis. The very people who may be most impacted by such a policy may be silenced. As I wrote at the beginning, this does not call for a piece of market research. What is needed is a study that looks at the differential impacts on the highly diverse population of Chula Vista. In a situation such as this, I would not have used a random sample. With a simple random sample, you cannot create a stratified random sample, to make sure you are reaching enough of the people who may have particular concerns so that you can adequately analyze their position vis-à-vis the other groups. This requires a more complex sampling design. I realize that important steps were taken to have a Spanish language and a Tagalog version, and to conduct several focus groups drawn again from some lists, but this falls far short of capturing the voices of many others in the community whose opinions and concerns should be a part of the crafting of such a policy. Finally, I also would add that the survey report is incredibly long, just like the survey, and very difficult for any lay person to digest. I spend a lot of time teaching students not only how to work on surveys but how to prepare their reports for their audience. Ultimately, as decision makers, the city council has the moral obligation to be sure they understand the information that they are given and to be able to interpret it properly. I pose these questions with respect for the work done; but also with great respect for all of the residents of Chula Vista. Sincerely, Norah P. Shultz, Ph.D. Norah P. Shultz, Ph.D. Pronouns: She / Her Professor of Sociology College of Arts & Letters Doctoral Faculty EdD Educational Leadership Community College Post-Secondary Education Program College of Education Director of Inclusive Curriculum Division of Student Affairs & Campus Diversity Nasatir Hall 210 San Diego State University SafeZones@SDSU Ally. Military Ally. Ability Ally. Indigenous hostlands: Birthplace: Lenapehoking; Residence: Kumeyaay Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 62 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 381 of 810 4Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 63 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 382 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From: Sent:Monday, August 15, 2022 7:21 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Recommendations Dear Members of the Chula Vista Privacy Advisory Task Force, As a Chula Vista resident, I would like to make some recommendations that can be part of this discussion. 1. Accountability for Breached Data I would recommend that the task force come up with a fair punishment when a breach occurs. Usually, the punishment for allowing a breach is a light slap on the wrist. More often than not, there is none. We will never have true data security until we start holding companies/governments and their executives/leaders legally and financially accountable for the security of any kind of consumer data they possess.” Basically, we need to hold the vendors and city leaders financially accountable. 2. Children Data I would like to recommend that ALL data be removed after captured. 3. Right of Citizen’s to OPT-OUT Recommend that each Chula Vista resident have the option to request to review their data and request to have the city erase/delete all data. Roman Covarrubias Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 64 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 383 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Seth Hall Sent:Sunday, August 14, 2022 8:32 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Items to consider regarding August 15 Subcommittee reports Attachments:2208 Tech Lead SD - Consideration Items RE Subcommittee Reports.pdf Distinguished task force members, Please see the attached document regarding items for your consideration as you continue to discuss your recommendations. I would appreciate a confirmation that this email has been received and distributed appropriately. Thank you all for your continued work on this important topic. Seth Hall, techleadsd.org Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 65 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 384 of 810 1 Technologists Tending the Grass Roots” August 14, 2022 Dear distinguished task force members, Please consider the attached suggestions as you deliberate regarding your final recommendations. Chula Vista residents deserve to determine for themselves how they will leverage new technology while protecting themselves from its many potential harms. The attached suggestions are sent in the spirit of collaboration among neighbors who are both actively working to answer similar questions, while also striving for the safest and healthiest city we can create. Sincerely and with respect, Seth Hall Tech Lead San Diego (member of the TRUST SD Coalition) Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 66 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 385 of 810 2 Items for Consideration Regarding August 15 Subcommittee Reports 1. The task force should consider making clear its intentions behind any exception to its recommendation prohibiting nondisclosure agreements, so that subsequent city attorneys reviewing the recommendation can provide proper guidance on how such an ordinance would be drafted. Many NDAs can be argued to contain “proprietary information,” and I don’t believe it is the desire of the task force to incentivize vendors to include proprietary information in the contract for the specific purpose of making contracts undisclosable under the task force’s recommended exception. In my experience, such tactics, while reprehensible from a public perspective, are entirely common in the for-profit vendor context. 2. The task force recommends that a convenience termination clause be added into vendor contracts for cases when a vendor requires their contract be placed under a NDA. If the task force chooses to recommend this, they may wish to further clarify what the task force believes the correct conditions are that would satisfy your intentions for convenience termination. For example, without additional guidance, convenience termination could be offered by a vendor, but only under the condition the City pays penalty fees that could equal the buyout cost of the contract. I don’t believe that the intention of the task force is to allow vendors to force the City to buy out the entire contract term in exchange for convenience termination in the case of an undisclosable NDA, because that does not protect Chula Vista taxpayers from predatory practices by vendors, and wouldn’t achieve any meaningful options or protection for the City. If the task force’s intention is that the city can terminate a vendor contract for convenience without any penalty whatsoever imposed by the vendor, the task force should make that intention clear in its recommendation. 3. The task force should reconsider its recommendation that allows for NDAs on vendor contracts in cases of proprietary information. Other subcommittee recommendations (PO&T) require vendor contracts to be posted publicly, and those recommendations do not provide for any exceptions. Upon Items regarding the Procurement Subcommittee Report Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 67 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 386 of 810 3 further deliberation, the task force may find that hiding vendor contracts from the public is always harmful to public interests and only serves the interests of private parties. 1. Each restriction placed on board membership carries a risk the board will not be able to be fully populated, which raises the risk of not achieving quorums, or that a minority of members could control the board’s decisions. The current recommendation potentially restricts 6 of the 9 seats, and does so in 3 different ways (residency, district residency, professional background). A minimum of 3 board members would have no restrictions whatsoever, beyond applicable law, which gives significant power to an individual who can appoint to those seats. Consider issues such as redistricting, as well as the ability of council members to interfere with the board’s functions by withholding nominations in their district. The task force should deliberate regarding the risks of board membership they are trying to mitigate, and ensure their final recommendation addresses the risks the task force believes are the highest and most likely risks. 2. Prior to making final recommendations, the task force should receive advice from city attorneys regarding the creation of boards and commissions, if the task force has not already received such advice. Existing limitations within the charter or municipal code could have the effect of substantially changing the task force’s recommendations if, for example, the task force’s preferred appointment process does not comply with current municipal code. 3. The task force is undecided on whether a seat on the board should be reserved for a past member of law enforcement. The task force should consider the option of neither reserving a seat for police, nor prohibiting police from the board. This model leaves the decision up to those responsible for appointments, who may have contemporary insights on the appropriateness of police membership on the board, at the time vacancies occur. If a seat is reserved for police, future appointees supported by the community may be ineligible for appointment, due to the strict requirement recommended by this task force. Items regarding the Privacy Advisory Board Subcommittee Report Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 68 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 387 of 810 4 4. The task force should consider whether it wants to recommend that a future privacy board be allowed to assemble via virtual meeting in addition to in-person meetings. Virtual meetings can be helpful to ensure quorums are achieved, and virtual meetings can also be helpful with increasing public participation. If the task force does not recommend the accommodation of virtual meetings, the city may not consider supporting that capability. 1. The task force recommends allowing the city to prioritize the surveillance technologies that should be reviewed by the board. Consider that the task force is recommending a board of community members, and that the community members are being carefully selected for residency and professional qualifications to ensure they provide trustworthy recommendations. Considering the careful requirements placed on board membership, the task force should consider capturing those board members’ input on the prioritization of technology to be reviewed. Appointed board members’ qualifications hopefully indicate a deeper knowledge of what technology is sensitive than what city staff may be aware of. Current task force recommendations cut board members entirely out of the prioritization process and put city staff in the driver’s seat. 1. Regarding data minimization, the task force should consider adding a recommendation that sensitive personal information in particular be specially handled and retained for only the minimum amount of time necessary to accomplish the most immediate and pressing goal of data collection. See later recommendation that “sensitive personal information” be defined as a term. 2. When the task force makes recommendations that items (such as sale of the public’s information) should not occur without “sign off,” the task force should consider being more specific with regard to its intention on the process of those approvals. For example, does the task force advise that the sale of public information should require a majority vote of city council, or merely the approval of a particular individual within City staff? Items regarding the Use Policies Subcommittee Report Items regarding the Data Subcommittee Report Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 69 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 388 of 810 5 3. Because the City’s Data Governance Committee is made up of only City staff, which variates with turnover, and is not structured by municipal code governing the City’s boards and commissions, the task force may want to consider removing references to the Data Governance Committee from the recommendations. The current recommendation attempts to incorporate the Data Governance Committee into the new privacy process, which may create conflicts of authority and process. 4. The task force should consider incorporating the term “Sensitive Personal Information” into the terms in need of definition, and the task force should consider recommending that the definition of the term permanently track the definition of Sensitive Personal Information as it is defined in the California Privacy Rights Act. See above #1 for recommendation on using this term to apply stronger protections for the public’s most sensitive data. 1. Nowhere in the subcommittee report are public meetings, community forums, or other live community education offered by City staff recommended. The task force should deliberate on whether posting signs, or posting links on the city website, is sufficient to ensure Chula Vista residents receive an acceptable level of awareness regarding the technology being deployed in their neighborhoods. 1. The task force includes activity covered by a NDA to be “Confidential Data” and undisclosable to the public. This is very broad because the task force does not know what data could be considered to be covered” by any given future NDA, since NDAs are negotiable and generally favorable to the non- city party. The task force should deliberate on whether this definition of Confidential Data is too favorable to vendors and poses unquantifiable risks to the public. 2. The task force includes in its definition of confidential data “information related to an allegation or investigation of misconduct.” This recommendation pulls the task force and privacy board into the controversy around public records controversies and California laws governing misconduct, such as SB 1421. The task force should deliberate on whether they believe a privacy ordinance is the proper Items regarding the Privacy Oversight & Transparency Subcommittee Report Items regarding the Information Security Subcommittee Report Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 70 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 389 of 810 6 venue to engage those controversies or whether the task force’s recommendation should instead lean on existing laws and public records processes and policies that already exist within the city. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 71 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 390 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 72 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 391 of 810 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 73 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 392 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Margaret Baker < Sent:Thursday, September 22, 2022 2:52 PM To:Privacy Task Force Subject:Please post attached Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance with Privacy Task Force meeting agenda Attachments:Revised Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance_2022-07-15.pdf Margaret A. Baker, DrPH South Bay People Power promotes social justice through nonpartisan civic engagement. Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 74 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 393 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Jason Essex Sent:Friday, September 2, 2022 10:08 AM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:New Chula Vista Privacy Policy Reply Greetings, I have had any number of issues for over ten years as it pertains to privacy. The root cause also always lead back to lawyers, attorneys, law firms, groups, organizations and company who do honor their oath, do do not state discovery, disclose why they are doing so as well as ignoring Caliofnria Consumer Protection Act. Each needs to be held accountable for not having a business listing it with the city and or state but a listing with the California State Bar. ANY *website* that ends in : .com is a business. In many cases they do not have a Privacy or Terms of Use page(s). I have to wonder how many data mining tools they use to capture your IP Address, Email information and the like. A Credential check needs to be run whenever a case is brought to the court as it pertains to these listings. If you can sight said legal entities ongoing failure to state Disclosure and Discovery they need to be penalized and this should count towards the opposing party. I also have to wonder why said entities that have my Social Security number have shared it with such legal sources and not been accountable. Monies have changed hands for the purpose of earning monies from said information. Does this not fall squarely under the California Consumer Protection Act as well as Disclosures and Discovery laws in addition to Business and Professional Ethics laws? To review these ongoing concerns please review my cases in the San Diego County Court House / Hall of Justice. I have not been paid fro any of my Intellectual Properties dating back to 2014 as of today. The courts have repeatedly frozen my assets without ever stating who the asset manager(s) are. With of twenty (20) such items for sale under the author names of By Jason Douglas Essex, By Jason Essex as well as the bulk being under By Jason D. Essex the sales platforms have never provided me with earnings information. As such this is identity, time and wage theft that has caused endless forced labor and costs in addition to endless stress. Here is a direct link to some of my content: https://www.facebook.com/ByJasonDEssexLocalAuthor https://books.apple.com/us/book/red-tape/id1529009437 https://books.apple.com/us/book/a-valentines-day-event-for-you-to-enjoy-too/id1571539079 Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 75 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 394 of 810 2 This appears to be the data mining and redirectional robot that is preventing me from having anisuch information or earnings on this sales platform: https://books.apple.com/us/book/living-the-dream/id437205980 Thank you for your time today. By Jason D. Essex Chula Vista, CA 91914 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 76 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 395 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Steve Goldkrantz < Sent:Tuesday, September 6, 2022 12:50 PM To:Adrianna Hernandez Cc:Privacy Task Force Subject:Re: Share your thoughts on privacy guidelines for the City of Chula Vista Ms. Hernandez, Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment and feedback. The draft is very well organized and written. As for the formation of a new Board including non-Chula Vista residents, I defer to the current regulations on the books concerning such a matter. It seems that there are four overarching issues at hand: 1) Cybersecurity - how the City of CV information is secured once collected - be it City Hall offices, the library, the Police Department, etc. This involves technical systems security matters, user procedures, and insider threat detection/mitigation. 2) Information Sharing Externally - this always presents a cybersecurity challenge, and again covers information technology transmissions from the technical level to the user level. Essentially, how information can technically be shared externally - legally and appropriately - while remaining secure. 3) Privacy - what information is deemed Private and [Sensitive] Personally Identifying Information under various laws and rules such a as the Privacy Act, 28 CFR 23, etc. and what are the regulations/rules guiding both the technology and end user applications. 4) Enforcement Technologies - with the rapid expansion of the City of Chula Vista, the Public Security Sector is challenged in meeting the demand for increased patrols, call responses, crime prevention, victim handling, etc. Technology is a force multiplier for deterring crime, responding to crimes, enabling community assistance, investigations, prosecution. Technology is critical to the entire law enforcement cycle needed to protect the residents of the City and those who are non-residents but work, attend school, shop, or have businesses here. Enforcement technologies are a force multiplier for public protection and the officers and first responders working it. All the above needs to wrapped up with incident detection, response, mitigation, resolution. It might not be bad for a Red Team” to challenge some of the existing processes as well as the gaps/concerns identified by the Privacy Task Force. Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment. The Mayor’s Office and the Privacy Task Force are more than welcome to reach back to me for any further questions, comments via this email or my phone: 619-823-3383. Thank you and have a great afternoon. Steve Goldkrantz Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 77 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 396 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Seth Hall Sent:Tuesday, September 6, 2022 4:23 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Suggestions for Draft Recommendations Attachments:2209 Tech Lead SD - Suggestions RE Draft Recommendations.pdf Task Force members, Please find attached a review of the draft recommendations and additional items for your consideration. Please confirm your receipt and distribution. Thank you! Seth Hall, Tech Lead San Diego Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 78 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 397 of 810 September 6, 2022 Dear distinguished task force members, Congratulations on reaching an important milestone in your work. The Task Force’s proposed draft of recommendations contains many important improvements, which will benefit the residents and visitors of Chula Vista. My below review expresses suggestions for 11 potential improvements to your draft recommendations. Among those 11 suggestions, I believe suggestions that are related to 4 items in particular would have the most significant impact on your recommendations. 1. The Task Force’s draft recommendations do not include a requirement that any specific approvals be required, prior to acquiring or using surveillance technology. My below Recommendation 2 strongly suggests adding that as a Task Force recommendation. 2. The Task Force is not currently recommending the use of impact reports as a tool to discover and mitigate potential harms caused by surveillance technology. My below Recommendation 3 suggests adding that as a Task Force recommendation. 3. The Task Force is not currently recommending any educational meetings with the public be held prior to acquisition or use of surveillance technology. My below Recommendation 6 suggests adding that as a Task Force recommendation. 4. The Task Force is not currently recommending the use of annual surveillance reports as a primary tool to achieve meaningful, ongoing oversight. My below Recommendation 11 suggests adding that as a Task Force recommendation. I suggest adding that as a Task Force recommendation. In addition, I suggest the Task Force create a Guiding Principles document to make clear the principles that the Task Force suggests be followed after the Task Force has finished its work, and the City attempts to translate Task Force recommendations into actions or law. Thank you for your continued work on this important topic. Seth Hall Tech Lead San Diego (member of the TRUST SD Coalition) seth@s3th.com Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 79 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 398 of 810 2 Suggestions for the Chula Vista Privacy Task Force Recommendation 1: Statement of Guiding Principles The Task force should consider adding a statement of principles that can guide City staff on the Task Force’s intentions once the Task Force has completed its work. Currently, the Task Force’s recommendations are highly detailed. Any City staff that attempts to translate Task Force items into municipal code may be forced to make assumptions about the values and principles that guided the Task Force’s recommendations. For example, the Task Force could state that all its recommendations are based in principles of public awareness, public benefit and public consent, and urge that any subsequent City efforts should strictly align to such principles. Any such statement would help ensure that the Task Force’s detailed recommendations are not misconstrued to justify outcomes that the Task Force did not intend. Recommendation 2: Approval for Acquisition and Use of Surveillance Technology The Task Force should consider recommending that the City’s proposed use policies be required to undergo advisory board review, and subsequent City Council approval, prior to acquiring or using surveillance technology. This requirement should be encountered at the earliest stages of surveillance technology acquisition or use. Currently, the Task Force recommendations do not require City Council approval prior to acquiring or using surveillance technology. The suggested requirements are only that contracts be presented and use policies be created and reviewed. No time frame or sequence for these presentations, creations and reviews is currently specified. No mechanism for rejection of a problematic technology is proposed by the Task Force. Without further requiring the City to achieve explicit City Council approval, City departments may continue to acquire and use technology without the knowledge of the public and City Council. All acquisitions and uses could be documented after-the-fact, after an undefined period of time, under the Task Force’s current recommendations. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 80 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 399 of 810 3 Additionally, unrecognized or obfuscated surveillance features of non-surveillance products could operate indefinitely without review, without consequences. This requirement for approval would ideally be encountered by the City prior to the phase of City staff seeking any funding for the acquisition or use. Recommendation 3: Requirement of Impact Reports The Task Force should consider recommending that the city be required to provide an impact report alongside any proposed use policy. Currently, the Task Force recommendations only require a Use Policy to be created for each surveillance technology. No impact reports are recommended. An impact report is a document that indicates the City has diligently investigated the impact its acquisition and use of technology will have on the public. The results discovered through the process of creating the impact report should heavily inform the City department’s proposed use policy. Without requiring an impact report, City departments could draft a use policy without considering whether that use policy successfully reduces the threat of harm to the community, or whether the use policy successfully mitigates other risks created by the introduction of the surveillance technology. Impact reports are included as a definition in the Task Force’s document, but they are not recommended. Recommendation 4: Advisory Board’s Conclusive Recommendation The Task Force should consider recommending that the advisory board conclude its advisory work in each case by advising council members to approve, reject, or modify the proposed use policy. Currently, the Task Force recommendations only cover the advisory board reviewing and suggesting changes to use policies brought by the City. Rejection of use policies is not mentioned. For the advisory board to have maximum usefulness to council members, the advisory board should be required to make clear a recommendation that the proposal be accepted, modified, or rejected. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 81 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 400 of 810 4 In the case of the advisory board evaluating contracts with privacy implications, the Recommendation 5: Advisory Board Evaluations The Task Force should consider changing its draft recommendation to instead reflect that the advisory board drafts its own evaluation, independent of City staff. Currently, the Task Force recommendations state that any evaluations of contracts be written by a combination of City staff and the advisory board. Procurement: 24. Under the Task Force’s current recommendation, council members would be unable to determine if evaluations were the product of employed City staff, or if they were the product of independent community experts. The advisory board should author its own evaluations so that council members can benefit from knowing the evaluations originate from a board of independent community experts. Since City staff will be presenting final proposals to City Council, City staff already have ample opportunity to document and voice their own evaluations. Recommendation 6: Educational Community Meetings Prior to Surveillance The Task Force should consider recommending that the city hold public educational meetings prior to submitting the documents for review or approval. Currently, the Task Force is not recommending the City hold any public meetings prior to drafting the technology’s use policy, or prior to acquiring or using surveillance technology. “Transparency and Oversight: 18(d)” The City may benefit greatly from increased public trust, if it makes the effort to hold public meetings to present surveillance proposals prior to writing documents and acquiring or using technology. Recommendation 7: Inventory of Existing Surveillance The Task Force should consider recommending that all currently used surveillance technology be inventoried, and that list be provided to the advisory board as a public document as the first order of business for the advisor board. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 82 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 401 of 810 5 Recommendation 8: City Council Approval Guidelines The Task Force should consider recommending the conditions under which council members can determine a surveillance technology is eligible for City Council approval. Currently, the Task Force does not recommend the City obtain City Council approval prior to acquisition or use of surveillance technology. If such a recommendation was added, the Task Force should provide guidance to council members on the minimum circumstances that should be present before City Council gives approval for a surveillance technology. The Task Force should consider suggesting minimum, non-controversial preconditions for City Council’s approval, such as requiring that the City Council judge that the technology’s benefits outweigh its costs, or requiring City Council to judge that no better alternative exists. Recommendation 9: Public Records The Task force should consider recommending that any use policies (and impact reports, if the Task Force chooses to add a recommendation for them) created in this process be explicitly defined as public documents, regularly maintained and well-presented to the public. Recommendation 10: Annual Surveillance Reports The Task Force should recommend that annual reports be required for all surveillance technologies. The reports should review the ongoing cost, usefulness, and integrity of any approved surveillance technology. Currently, the Task Force does not recommend annual reports. Annual reports form the basis of ongoing oversight. They provide the advisory board and the City Council with opportunities to safeguard the rights of the public and to maximize budget efficiency, by identifying technologies that are not producing expected results. Annual reports also help the public understand how surveillance technology is benefiting public goals. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 83 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 402 of 810 6 The definition for Annual Reports is already included in the Task Force’s recommendation, but the Task Force does not currently have a recommendation that aligns with the definition. Recommendation 11: Whistleblower Protections The Task Force should consider that any non-compliant use of surveillance technology will be observed first by City staff. Encouraging those staff to report the non-compliant use to their supervisors is the most efficient and most desirable way to handle any such issues. If the Task Force agrees, then it should consider recommending the City adopt specific whistleblower protections, to ensure City staff feels they can safely report non-compliant activity, without risk of retaliation. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 84 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 403 of 810 September 3, 2022 Adrianna Hernandez Special Projects Manager | Office of the City Manager City of Chula Vista | 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 619-691-5254 | ADHernandez@chulavistaca.gov Let me preface my remarks by thanking you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Summary of Policy Recommendations. My comments are limited to the application of these recommendations as they impact law enforcement and more specifically the CVPD, Sheriff and National City. I speak from a background in law and law enforcement having been a sworn member of the CVPD and SDSO and a licensed attorney representing clients in the area of civil litigation. I served on the 2021-22 County Grand Jury where my Law and Justice committee examined and extensively studied the issue of privacy rights and the impact of surveillance and modern technology on the public. The 2021-2022 Grand Jury published our findings and recommendations which can be found at: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/grandjury. That being said, the recommendations being proposed are, I believe, incomplete and present potential serious issues concerning public welfare and safety. 2. “The Privacy Advisory Board should have nine members, at least two-thirds of whom are Chula Vista residents.” It is no surprise that the authors specifically left out inclusion of representatives from law enforcement and victim’s rights advocates The special interest groups, working under the guise of the San Diego TRUST coalition, drafted and presented the exact same recommendations for the City of San Diego. One only need look at the composition of that group to understand the real purpose behind their agenda. Best practices studies show that “city council decisions are more likely to be seen as fair and considerate if all people having a stake in the outcome” are involved. Asking nine people, none of whom have any experience in law enforcement, to make recommendations on what is acceptable use of a piece of modern technology is like asking a jury of nine to determine guilt or innocents after hearing testimony and seeing evidence from only one party to a case. At the August meeting of the Advisory group, a member of TRUST stated they were only interested in being sure that all members of the community were represented. It appears TRUST does not view law enforcement or victims of crime to be part of the Chula Vista community. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 85 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 404 of 810 Using that as background, the recommendations fail to address serious concerns unique to law enforcement. The CVPD works closely with the SDSO, which serves the unincorporated area of Bonita, and with the NCPD. The departments are often called upon to assist each other. This close symbiotic working relationship often requires sharing of information by each organization. That need for sharing must be recognized and incorporated in the guidelines the advisory board works and collaboration with outside agencies must be considered when recommending any rules on surveillance or use of equipment such as drones. Along the same lines, the use of surveillance technology as it specifically applies to law enforcement cannot be adequately explained by a non-law enforcement lay person. Hence, any recommendations concerning use of technology must include specific and articulable rationale from the CVPD (or other L.E. sources) as to the appropriateness of the board’s recommendation. If necessary, provisions should be included allowing such presentation to be made in a closed door session. In addition, the CVPD has officers assigned to various state and federal task forces. In their roles, secret and sensitive information must be shared. Any attempt to quash that sharing might jeopardize further participation by CVPD personnel and affect public safety. Clarification with regard to sharing of such data should be included. Once again, this will require input from high level members of the CVPD. Finally, I see no provision for discussion of sensitive material among the advisory board members. Secrecy should be addressed and violations should be subject to criminal and/or administrative sanctions. Once again, I thank you for providing the opportunity to address these issues. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 86 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 405 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Robert Johnson < > Sent:Thursday, August 25, 2022 6:19 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Fwd: Some of my concerns. Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device Get Outlook for Android From: Robert Johnson < > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2022 6:18:50 PM To: adhernandez@chulavistaca.gov <adhernandez@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Some of my concerns. Some of the paper I've been looking at is call for service. In the data case numbers and many thing are identifiers and can be cross referenced with identifying data in call for service fire department. If they are public records that's the thing it's more detailed on the fire department. I think a standardized version should be ready available to both like the police already have. It's in power bi updates automatically and is very easy to get to. If privacy is a concern sending out city votes for another city to count let alone in machines not made in America. The dod has many hundreds of documents assessments of how nation security risks and what systems are a threat to have a secure election yet mail in ballots remain high risk and you embrace it. If privacy is a concern why are you all talking about noncitzen privacy. And not our privacy. I see a lack of knowledge and leadership thinking they know what makes America safe. Bet you can even fix ur own cell phone.. If u want threat assessment maybe go to the foia web search and read on past elections. We could hold 1000person in person ballots one day and everyone could feel safer about voting. He let's have voter ID so non citizens can't vote. Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device Get Outlook for Android Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 87 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 406 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:John Richeson < > Sent:Saturday, August 27, 2022 12:13 PM To:Adrianna Hernandez Cc:Privacy Task Force Subject:Re: Share your thoughts on privacy guidelines for the City of Chula Vista The foundational recommendation that "The City should create written Use Policies that govern the use of each privacy-impacting technology and the data generated by those technologies" is so general and vague with should meaning compliance is voluntary) as to be meaningless. The duties of the Chief Privacy Officer should be: 1. Prepare and maintain an inventory of data systems within the City that collect, retain, and/or exchange citizen information with outside entities including, but not limited to: the DMV, County Assessor, State and Federal Government agencies, SDG&E, Republic Services, Community Power, telecommunication providers, credit agencies, law enforcement, and the courts. 2. Periodically assess, or have to be assessed, the justification for collecting, retaining and/or sharing of citizen information, and the vulnerabilities of departmental data systems to the release of citizen information without their consent to third parties. 3. Require data system owners and administrators to develop and enforce citizen data security using the latest available encryption and network protection technologies, together with administrative procedures to minimize human error. 4. Annually report to the City Council on the status of data systems within the City. Respectfully, John Richeson If it is worth doing, it is worth doing right" On 08/25/2022 5:34 PM PDT Adrianna Hernandez <adhernandez@chulavistaca.gov> wrote: Greetings, After many meetings and many hours of work, the Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force<https://www.chulavistaca.gov/businesses/smart-city/projects/privacytaskforce> has developed a draft set of policy recommendations for the City Manager. Now it's your turn. The task force is looking for feedback from the public. A full draft of the policy recommendations<https://www.chulavistaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/25071> has been posted online, and community members are encouraged to provide comments in writing to privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov<mailto:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov>. Please send in your thoughts no later than Tuesday, Sept. 6 so they can be compiled and shared with task force members before their next meeting. Additionally, you are welcome to attend and speak during the public comment session at the upcoming task force meeting on Monday, Sept. 12 or Monday, Sept. 26. Public comment is open from 6 to 6:20 Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 88 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 407 of 810 2 p.m. and at the end of each meeting. There will be further opportunities to comment when a final report and policies are presented to the City Council in November. Please feel free to share this information with anyone who may be interested. Thank you! Sincerely, Adrianna Hernandez Special Projects Manager | Office of the City Manager City of Chula Vista | 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 619-691-5254 | ADHernandez@chulavistaca.gov<mailto:ADHernandez@chulavistaca.gov> Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 89 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 408 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:David Stucky <david.stucky@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Saturday, August 27, 2022 12:58 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Task Force Recommendations Attachments:Summary of Policy Recommendations with comments.pdf Attached is the task force document with comments and observations. Please feel free to contact me for any needed explanations or clarifications. David Stucky 619-972-3721 david.stucky@sbcglobal.net Warning: External Email Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 1 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 90 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 409 of 810 Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force Summary of Policy Recommendations DRAFT VERSION – August 25, 2022 Note: To facilitate discussion and review, the policy recommendations are numbered in this document. There is no particular order or significance to the numbering scheme or the section headings in this draft. Privacy Advisory Board 1. The City should establish a Privacy Advisory Board responsible for carrying out a broad range of advisory duties. a. The Board’s duties are described throughout this document, including: i. Holding regular meetings that are open to the public, including opportunities for public comment in English and other languages. ii. Reviewing Use Policies for privacy-impacting technologies and making recommendations on changes iii. Reviewing data sharing agreements. iv. Reviewing new technology-related contracts. 2. The Privacy Advisory Board should have nine members, at least two-thirds of whom are Chula Vista residents. a. Chula Vista residents should comprise a super-majority of Board members because residents experience the impacts of City decisions on privacy and technology to a much greater degree than non-residents do. b. The purpose of allowing non-residents to serve on the Board is to recognize that non-residents also experience the impacts of City decisions on privacy and technology, especially if they work, own a business, or attend school in Chula Vista. Additionally, non-residents may have valuable expertise or perspectives that should be included on the Board. c. There is no requirement to include non-residents on the Board. 3. Privacy Advisory Board members will be selected through a combination of City staff review, community review, and City Council review. a. Members of the Board should be selected through a process that includes review and vetting by both City staff and by community leaders, similar to the process used to appoint members of the Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force. b. All members of the Board must be approved by a majority vote of the City Council pursuant to the City Charter. c. The purpose of involving community leaders in the selection process for some members is to ensure that Board membership is not exclusively determined by City staff or elected officials. 4. Selections to the Board should reflect the City’s diversity in terms of race, gender, and age. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 2 Notes 1 08/27/2022 12:14:581Dave This should be the only criterion for including non-residents 2 08/27/2022 12:16:102Dave Define community leader. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 91 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 410 of 810 All Board members shall be persons who have an interest in privacy rights as demonstrated by work experience, civic participation, and/or political advocacy. No member may be an elected official. No member may have a financial interest, employment, or policy-making position in any commercial or for-profit facility, research center, or other organization that sells surveillance equipment or profits from decisions made by the Board. Each of the following perspectives should be represented by at least one member of the Board: a. A resident of Council District 1 b. A resident of Council District 2 c. A resident of Council District 3 d. A resident of Council District 4 e. A technology professional with expertise in emerging technologies and systems this perspective should be represented by three members of the board) f. A professional financial auditor or Certified Public Accountant (CPA) g. An attorney, legal scholar, or recognized academic with expertise in privacy and/or civil rights h. A member of an organization that focuses on government transparency or individual privacy i. A representative from an equity-based organization or a member of the Human Relations Commission. j. A former member of the Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force (only applies to the first year of appointments) Chief Privacy Officer 5. The City should hire a full-time Chief Privacy Officer responsible for carrying out a broad range of duties related to privacy. a. Until a full-time Chief Privacy Officer can be budgeted and hired, the duties of the Chief Privacy Officer should be carried out by the Chief Information Security Officer. b. The Chief Privacy Officer should report to the City Manager to ensure they are accountable to City Council and the voters of Chula Vista. i. A minority of task force members believes the Chief Privacy Officer should report to the City Attorney to ensure they are accountable to the voters of Chula Vista. c. The Chief Privacy Officer’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to: i. Provide regular training sessions and guidance to City staff on privacy issues. ii. Serve as the primary City staff liaison to the Privacy Advisory Board, including: 1. Managing agendas and coordinating meetings Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 3 Notes 1 08/27/2022 12:20:041Dave Don't forget the need for an appropriate level of support staff. 2 08/27/2022 12:13:142Dave In a representative democracy, the City Council are the representatives of the voters. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 92 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 411 of 810 2. Managing the selection process for Privacy Advisory Board members 3. Assisting in the preparation and presentation of technology Use Policies for Board review iii. Performing internal audits and ensuring compliance with data retention standards and use policies, and coordinating with external privacy auditors when applicable iv. Evaluating new technology acquisitions for potential privacy issues Use Policies 6. The City should create written Use Policies that govern the use of each privacy-impacting technology and the data generated by those technologies. a. Each policy should clearly state the purpose of the technology, who will be allowed to access the technology, how the technology can be used, what kind of data the technology generates, how that data can be used, how that data is protected, and the retention period for that data. 7. Use Policies should be drafted by the applicable department in consultation with the Chief Privacy Officer, then reviewed by the Privacy Advisory Board. a. Departments will use a template created by the Chief Privacy Officer. 8. Use Policies should be reviewed annually and updated if necessary. Use policies should also be reviewed and updated any time there is a significant change in the function or purpose of the technology. 9. Due to the large number of use policies that may need to be created or updated, the Chief Privacy Officer and Privacy Advisory Board will perform an analysis that prioritizes current and future technologies based on the impact and risks to individual privacy. Based on the results of this analysis, use policies will be reviewed for the highest-ranked technologies first. a. Facial recognition technology, other biometric systems, surveillance systems, and systems that use machine learning algorithms should be a top priority for Board review. Data Retention and Data Sharing 10. The City should never sell the data it collects nor allow third parties working on behalf of the City to sell or use data owned by the City except as necessary to provide the contracted service to the City. 11. Internal data-sharing between City Departments should be subject to a review process that includes approval by the City Manager and periodic review by the Chief Privacy Officer and Privacy Advisory Board. a. The purpose of this policy recommendation is to ensure there is a clear understanding of how data is being used and shared between departments, and to Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 4 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 93 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 412 of 810 prevent situations where there is uncertainty around how data is being used, such as in the case of the informal data-sharing that occurred between Engineering and the Police Department regarding traffic signal camera feeds. 12. External data-sharing between the City and third parties must be approved through a formal, auditable process that includes the Chief Privacy Officer and Privacy Advisory Board. a. The purpose of this policy recommendation is to prevent situations like the sharing of ALPR data with law enforcement agencies that should not have had access to it. b. The review should ensure that personal information is not being shared and that the data has been repackaged and de-identified to minimize the possibility of privacy violations. 13. The City Records Retention Schedule should be re-organized and expanded to include information on what personal data is collected and when that data will be deleted. a. As part of these updates, the Records Retention schedule should be presented in a format that provides a category for data type in addition to the existing categories. b. The Chief Privacy Officer should collaborate with the City Clerk to lead this process. 14. The City should establish a more formal process for ensuring that personal data is being deleted according to the Use Policies established for that data. 15. The City should establish a policy that it will not collect personal data unless it is absolutely necessary to provide the core service. a. The Chula Vista Public Library’s approach to personal data is a model that should be followed citywide. Personal data is only collected and retained for the period necessary to provide the service. For example, the library keeps a record of an item checked out by an individual borrower only until that item is returned, at which point data related to that transaction is deleted. b. To ensure compliance with this policy, the Chief Privacy Officer should randomly sample Departments or data sets to review on a periodic basis. 16. Where possible, the City should anonymize, remove, or de-identify data that relates to a person. a. It must be understood and acknowledged that anonymization strategies will not completely protect individuals from having their identities reverse-engineered from otherwise anonymized datasets, but these strategies are still valuable in mitigating risks to individual privacy. 17. The role of the City’s Data Governance Committee should be more clearly defined and communicated to the public. a. The City should ensure that the work of the Data Governance Committee is consistent with the City’s adopted privacy policies and with the role or recommendations of the Privacy Advisory Board. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 5 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 94 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 413 of 810 Transparency and Oversight 18. City staff should provide the public with full disclosures about what technologies have been acquired, what data is being collected, and how that data is being used. a. These disclosures should happen in a variety of ways, including on the City’s website, through email newsletters, social media, and in printed communications mailed to residents. b. These disclosures should address what data is being collected, what department is collecting it, how it is being used, who has access to it, how long it is retained, etc. c. Where feasible, signs should be posted to notify and disclose surveillance technology. For example, if surveillance cameras are added to parks, signs should be posted notifying visitors that they are under video surveillance. d. The City should hold public forums, educational seminars, and other types of community events to ensure the public is informed and has an opportunity to hold the City accountable for how privacy-impacting technologies are being used. e. All public disclosures related to technology, data, and privacy should be provided with adequate time for public review before any meeting. The 72-hour standard is not sufficient for the public to review and consider new information, especially when that time period coincides with weekends and holidays. 19. Information about privacy and technology that is provided on the City website should be easy to find and easy to understand. a. Links to disclosures should be provided on each Department’s page within the City website. b. The City’s “smart city” webpages should have their own navigational tab or section on the City website, rather than being contained under the Business / Economic Development section. 20. Contracts with technology vendors should be easy for the public to find and review. a. This should include information about the status of existing contracts, including upcoming renewal or termination dates. 21. Data breaches should be publicly disclosed as soon as possible. a. Notification should happen within 24 hours of the data breach being confirmed. b. Notification should occur through a wide range of communications channels, including social media, news media, and the City website. 22. Residents should have the opportunity to opt-out or have their data deleted if it was provided voluntarily to the City and is not needed for City operations. a. It is understood that individuals will not be able to opt-out of certain types of data collection, such as a drone responding to 9-1-1 calls, or medical data being retained following a emergency medical service call. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 6 Notes 1 08/27/2022 12:30:381Dave Contracts with technology vendors should be subject to the same disclosure standards as those of any other vendor contracts. 2 08/27/2022 12:33:342Dave Voluntarily" provided data implies the option to decline to provide in the first place. And if it not needed for City operations, it probably should not have been collected in the first place. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 95 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 414 of 810 Procurement 23. All contracts with privacy implications must be presented to the City Council, regardless of whether they meet standard purchasing and contracting thresholds that typically trigger City Council review. 24. Prior to City Council presentation, contracts with privacy implications must be reviewed by the Chief Privacy Officer and the Privacy Advisory Board. The evaluation provided by the Chief Privacy Officer and the Privacy Advisory Board must be included as part of the report presented to City Council. 25. When acquiring new technology systems, the Chief Information Security Officer and Chief Privacy Officer should prepare an assessment of the technology’s potential impact on the City’s information security and detail any mitigation strategies. This assessment should be provided to the Privacy Advisory Board and the City Council at the same time as any other documents provided for review, such as the contract for the technology (Item 24) and the technology's proposed Use Policy (Item 7). 26. The City may not enter into any agreement that prohibits the City from publicly acknowledging that it has acquired or is using a particular technology. Nondisclosure agreements are acceptable only to extent that they protect a vendor’s proprietary information without prohibiting the City’s acknowledgement of a relationship with the vendor. 27. Contracts should include a clause of convenience that allows the City to terminate the agreement in the event the vendor violates any restriction on the sale or sharing of data or otherwise violates individual privacy protections. 28. Technology contracts should require that vendors provide the City with the capability to audit or review who has accessed what information. a. These access reports should be provided at pre-designated intervals to City staff or third-party auditors. 29. City staff should be provided with additional training to assist in recognizing potential data privacy issues in contracts. a. Key staff to receive additional training includes the Chief Privacy Officer, Chief Information Security Officer, City Attorney staff, and purchasing and contracting staff. 30. Changes in the ownership of a privacy-impacting technology that has already been reviewed by the Privacy Advisory Board should trigger a new review by the Privacy Advisory Board. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 7 Notes 1 08/27/2022 12:36:171Dave Privacy implications" is too broad a term. The standard needs to be more narrowly defined. 2 08/27/2022 12:38:592Dave It is not inconceivable that an agreement with, for example, a federal agency could reasonably prohibit public disclosure. 3 08/27/2022 12:40:153Dave Virtually all municipal contracts should already include the right to terminate for convenience. Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 96 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 415 of 810 Information Security 31. Establish a comprehensive information security policy that addresses procedures for maintaining and controlling access to data and articulates the roles and responsibilities of data stewards and data custodians. a. An outline of such a policy has been developed by the Information Security subcommittee of this Task Force and will be submitted as part of this recommendation. b. The policy should make clear that only City-owned mobile equipment using two- factor authentication should be allowed to connect to the City’s primary network. Any personal devices connecting to the City’s network must use restricted “guest” access. c. The policy should provide for audits of all City-owned equipment to protect against unauthorized storage of regulated data. d. The policy should require data security breaches to be reviewed and addressed by an established panel that includes the Director of Information Technology Services, the Chief Information Security Officer, the Chief of Police, the City Attorney, and the Chief Privacy Officer. e. The policy should require that data is stored and transmitted in encrypted formats whenever possible and prohibit the communication of confidential data through end-user messaging technologies such as email, instant messaging, chat, or other communication methods. f. The policy should specifically address mobile computing devices, including recovery of data in the event a mobile computing device is lost or stolen. Additional Comments The Task Force has received multiple public comments regarding the methodology used to conduct the public opinion survey and focus groups. The Task Force encourages City staff and City Councilmembers to consider the potential for bias in the results of the public opinion research, particularly as described in the letter from Dr. Norah Shultz of San Diego State University, which was provided as part of the August 15 Task Force meeting agenda. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 8 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 97 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 416 of 810 Appendix A: Definitions DRAFT – August 25, 2022 1.“Annual Surveillance Report” means a written report concerning a specific surveillance technology that includes all the following: a. A description of how the surveillance technology was used, including the type and quantity of data gathered or analyzed by the technology; b. Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the surveillance technology was shared with internal or external entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed, under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the disclosure(s) except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; c. Where applicable, a description of the physical objects to which the surveillance technology hardware was installed without revealing the specific location of such hardware; for surveillance technology software, a breakdown of what data sources the surveillance technology was applied to; d. Where applicable, a description of where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically, by each Police Area in the relevant year; e. A summary of community complaints or concerns about the surveillance technology, and an analysis of its Surveillance Use Policy and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and civil liberties. The analysis shall consider whether, and to what extent, the use of the surveillance technology disproportionately impacts certain groups or individuals; f. The results of any internal audits or investigations relating to surveillance technology, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response. To the extent that the public release of such information is prohibited by law, City staff shall provide a confidential report to the City Council regarding this information to the extent allowed by law; g. Information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; h. A general description of all methodologies used to detect incidents of data breaches or unauthorized access, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 9 Notes 1 08/27/2022 12:52:451Dave Nowhere in this report is surveillance mentioned until now. Where does this come from and how does this fit into the overall scheme of the report? Who is responsible for the creation of this "Annual Surveillance Report" and to whom is it presented? Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 98 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 417 of 810 security interests of the City; I. Information, including crime statistics, that helps the community assess whether the surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified purposes; i. Statistics and information about Public Records Act requests regarding the relevant subject surveillance technology, including response rates, such as the number of Public Records Act requests on such surveillance technology and the open and close date for each of these Public Records Act requests; j. Total annual costs for the surveillance technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs, and what source of funding will fund the surveillance technology in the coming year; and k. Any requested modifications to the Surveillance Use Policy and a detailed basis for the request. 2. “City” means any department, unit, program, and/or subordinate division of the City of Chula Vista as provided by Chapter XXXX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 3. “City staff” means City personnel authorized by the City Manager or appropriate City department head to seek City Council Approval of Surveillance Technology in conformance with this Chapter. 4. “Community meeting” means a publicly held meeting that is accessible, noticed at least seventy-two hours in advance in at least two languages, for the purpose of educating communities, answering questions, and learning about potential impacts of surveillance technology on disadvantaged groups. 5. “Continuing agreement” means a written agreement that automatically renews unless terminated by one or more parties. 6. “Exigent circumstances” means a City department’s good faith belief that an emergency involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any individual requires the use of surveillance technology that has not received prior approval by City Council. 7. “Facial recognition technology” means an automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual based on an individual’s face. 8. “Individual” means a natural person. 9. “Personal communication device” means a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant, a wireless capable tablet and a similar wireless two-way communications and/or portable internet- accessing device, whether procured or subsidized by a City entity or personally owned, that is used in the regular course of City business. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 10 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 99 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 418 of 810 10. “Police area” refers to each of the geographic districts assigned to a Chula Vista Police Department captain or commander and as such districts are amended from time to time. 11. “Sensitive personal information” will reflect the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) definition of personal information which defines the term to include: l) personal information that reveals: A) a consumer’s social security, driver’s license, state identification card, or passport number; B) a consumer’s account log-in, financial account, debit card, or credit card number in combination with any required security or access code, password, or credentials allowing access to an account; C) a consumer’s precise geolocation; D) a consumer’s racial or ethnic origin, religious or philosophical beliefs, or union membership; E) the contents of a consumer’s mail, email and text messages, unless the business is the intended recipient of the communication; F) a consumer’s genetic data; and 2) (A) the processing of biometric information for the purpose of uniquely identifying a consumer; B) personal information collected and analyzed concerning a consumer’s health; or C) personal information collected and analyzed concerning a consumer’s sex life or sexual orientation. 12. “Surveillance” (or “spying”) means to observe or analyze the movements, behavior, data, or actions of individuals. Individuals include those whose identity can be revealed by data or combinations of data, such as license plate data, images, IP addresses, user identifications, unique digital identifiers, or data traces left by the individual. 13. “Surveillance technology” means any software (e.g., scripts, code, Application Programming Interfaces), electronic device, or system utilizing an electronic device used, designed, or primarily intended to observe, collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group. It also includes the product (e.g., audiovisual recording, data, analysis, report) of such surveillance technology. Examples of surveillance technology include, but are not limited to the following: cell site simulators Stingrays); automated license plate readers; gunshot detectors (ShotSpotter); drone-mounted data collection; facial recognition software; thermal imaging systems; body-worn cameras; social media analytics software; gait analysis software; video cameras that can record audio or video and transmit or be remotely accessed. It also includes software designed to monitor social media services or forecast and/or predict criminal activity or criminality, and biometric identification hardware or software. “Surveillance technology” does not include devices, software, or hardware, unless they have been equipped with, or are modified to become or include, a surveillance technology beyond what is set forth below or used beyond a purpose as set forth below: Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 11 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 100 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 419 of 810 a. Routine office hardware, such as televisions, computers, credit card machines, badge readers, copy machines, and printers, that is in widespread use and will not be used for any public surveillance or law enforcement functions related to the public; b. Parking Ticket Devices (PTDs) used solely for parking enforcement-related purposes, including any sensors embedded in parking sensors to detect the presence of a car in the space; c. Manually-operated, non-wearable, handheld digital cameras, audio recorders, and video recorders that are not designed to be used surreptitiously and whose functionality is limited to manually-capturing and manually-downloading video and/or audio recordings; d. Surveillance devices that cannot record or transmit audio or video or be remotely accessed, such as image stabilizing binoculars or night vision goggles; e. Manually-operated technological devices used primarily for internal municipal entity communications and are not designed to surreptitiously collect surveillance data, such as radios and email systems; f. City databases that do not contain any data or other information collected, captured, recorded, retained, processed, intercepted, or analyzed by surveillance technology, including payroll, accounting, or other fiscal databases; g. Medical equipment used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease or injury, provided that any information obtained from this equipment is used solely for medical purposes; h. Police department interview room cameras; i. City department case management systems; j. Personal Communication Devices that have not been modified beyond stock manufacturer capabilities in a manner described above; k. Surveillance technology used by the City solely to monitor and conduct internal investigations involving City employees, contractors, and volunteers; and, l. Systems, software, databases, and data sources used for revenue collection on behalf of the City by the City Treasurer, provided that no information from these sources is shared by the City Treasurer with any other City department or third-party except as part of efforts to collect revenue that is owed to the City. 14. “Surveillance Impact Report” means a publicly-posted written report including, at a minimum, the following: a. Description: Information describing the surveillance technology and how it works, including product descriptions from manufacturers; Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 12 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 101 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 420 of 810 b. Purpose: Information on the proposed purposes(s) for the surveillance technology; c. Location: The physical or virtual location(s) it may be deployed, using general descriptive terms, and crime statistics for any location(s); d. Impact: An assessment of the Surveillance Use Policy for the particular technology and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and liberties and whether the surveillance technology was used or deployed, intentionally or inadvertently, in a manner that may disproportionately affect marginalized communities; e. Mitigations: Identify specific, affirmative technical and procedural measures that will be implemented to safeguard the public from each identified impact; f. Data Types and Sources: A list of all types and sources of data to be collected, analyzed, or processed by the surveillance technology, including open source data, scores, reports, logic or algorithm used, and any additional information derived therefrom; g. Data Security: Information about the controls that will be designed and implemented to ensure that adequate security objectives are achieved to safeguard the data collected or generated by the surveillance technology from unauthorized access or disclosure; h. Fiscal Costs and Sources: The forecasted, prior, and ongoing fiscal costs for the surveillance technology, including initial purchase, personnel, and other ongoing costs, and any past, current or potential sources of funding; i. Third-Party Dependence: Whether use or maintenance of the surveillance technology will require data gathered by the surveillance technology to be handled or stored by a third-party vendor at any time; j. Alternatives: A summary of all alternative methods (whether involving the use of a new technology or not) considered before deciding to use the proposed surveillance technology, including the costs and benefits associated with each alternative and an explanation of the reasons why each alternative is inadequate; k. Track Record: A summary of the experience (if any) other entities, especially government entities, have had with the proposed technology, including, if available, quantitative information about the effectiveness of the proposed surveillance technology in achieving its stated purpose in other jurisdictions, and any known adverse information about the surveillance technology such as unanticipated costs, failures, or civil rights and civil liberties abuses, existing publicly reported controversies, and any court rulings in favor or in opposition to the surveillance; and l. Public engagement and comments: A description of any community engagement held and any future community engagement plans, number of attendees, a compilation of all comments received and City departmental responses given, and City departmental Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 13 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 102 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 421 of 810 conclusions about potential neighborhood impacts and how such impacts may differ as it pertains to different segments of the community that may result from the acquisition of surveillance technology. 15. "Surveillance Use Policy" means a publicly-released and legally-enforceable policy for use of the surveillance technology that at a minimum specifies the following: a. Purpose: The specific purpose(s) that the surveillance technology is intended to advance; b. Use: The specific uses that are authorized, and the rules and processes required prior to such use; c. Data Collection: The information that can be collected, captured, recorded, intercepted, or retained by the surveillance technology, as well as data that might be inadvertently collected during the authorized uses of the surveillance technology and what measures will be taken to minimize and delete such data. Where applicable, any data sources the surveillance technology will rely upon, including open source data, should be listed; d. Data Access: The job classification of individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the rules and processes required prior to access or use of the information; e. Data Protection: The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access, including logging, encryption, and access control mechanisms; f. Data Retention: The time period, if any, for which information collected by the surveillance technology will be routinely retained, the reason such retention period is appropriate to further the purpose(s), the process by which the information is regularly deleted after that period lapses, and the specific conditions that must be met to retain information beyond that period; g. Public Access: A description of how collected information can be accessed or used by members of the public, including criminal defendants; h. Third Party Data Sharing: If and how information obtained from the surveillance technology can be used or accessed, including any required justification or legal standard necessary to do so and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information; i. Training: The training required for any individual authorized to use the surveillance technology or to access information collected by the surveillance technology; j. Auditing and Oversight: The procedures used to ensure that the Surveillance Use Policy is followed, including internal personnel assigned to ensure compliance with the policy, internal recordkeeping of the use of the surveillance technology or access to information Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:3 Page 14 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 103 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 422 of 810 collected by the surveillance technology, technical measures to monitor for misuse, any independent person or entity with oversight authority, and the legally enforceable sanctions for violations of the policy; and k. Maintenance: The procedures used to ensure that the security and integrity of the surveillance technology and collected information will be maintained. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:2 Page 15 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 104 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 423 of 810 Information Security Subcommittee Report August 15, 2022 Members: Charles Walker and Carlos De La Toba Recommended City Information Security Policies PURPOSE: To provide guidelines with regard to the responsibility of every City of Chula Vista (City) employee who accesses Data and information in electronic formats and to provide for the security of that Data and to restrict unauthorized access to such information. POLICY: Electronic Data is important to the City assets that must be protected by appropriate safeguards and managed with respect to Data stewardship. This policy defines the required Electronic Data ma nagement environment and classifications of Data, and assigns responsibility for ensuring Data and information privacy and security at each level of access and control. SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY: This policy applies to all City personnel and affiliated users with access to City Data. DEFINITIONS: Affiliated Users: Vendors and guests who have a relationship to the City and need access to City systems. Application or App: A software program run on a computer or mobile device for the purpose of providing a business/academic/social function. Cloud: An on-demand availability, geographically dispersed infrastructure of computer system resources, especially data storage (cloud storage) and computing power, without direct active management by the end user. Clouds may be limited to a single organization (Private Cloud), or be available to many organizations Public Cloud). Cloud-computing providers offer their “services” according to three standard models: Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS). Confidential Data: Data that are specifically restricted from open disclosure to the public by law are classified as Confidential Data. Confidential Data requires a high level of protection against unau thorized disclosure, modification, transmission, destruction, and use. Confidential Data include, but are not limited to: Medical Data, such as Electronic Protected Health Information and Data protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA); Investigation. Only investigation data and information within the following broad categories is to be considered Confidential Data: o Active Investigations; o Activity that is covered by a fully executed non-disclosure agreement (NDA); o Information, data, etc., that is proprietary or confidential (whether it belongs to an internal investigator or an outside collaborator), regardless of whether it is subject to an NDA; o Information or data that is required to be deemed confidential by state or federal law (e.g., personally identifying information about research subjects, HIPAA or FERPA protected information, etc.); and o Information related to an allegation or investigation into misconduct. Information access security, such as login passwords, Personal Identification Numbers (PINS), logs with personally identifiable Data, digitized signatures, and encryption keys; Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:2 Page 16 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 105 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 424 of 810 Primary account numbers, cardholder Data, credit card numbers, payment card information, banking information, employer or taxpayer identification number, demand deposit account number, savings account number, financial transaction device account number, account password , stock or other security certificate or account number (such as Data protected by the Payment Card Indu stry Data Security Standard) ; Personnel file, including Social Security Numbers; Library records; Driver’s license numbers, state personal identification card numbers, Social Security Numbers, employee identification numbers, government passport numbers, and other personal information that is protected from disclosure by state and federal identity theft laws and regulations. Data Classifications: All Electronic Data covered by this policy are assigned one of three classifications: Confidential Operation Critical Unrestricted Data Custodian: Persons or departments providing operational support for an information system and having responsibility for implementing the Data Maintenance and Control Method defined by the Data Steward. Data Maintenance and Control Method: The process defined and approved by the Data Steward to handle the following tasks: Definition of access controls with assigned access, privilege enablement, and documented management approval, based on job functions and requirements. Identification of valid Data sources Acceptable methods for receiving Data from identified sources Process for the verification of received Data Rules, standards and guidelines for the entry of new Data, change of existing Data or deletion of Data Rules, standards and guidelines for controlled access to Data Process for Data integrity verification Acceptable methods for distributing, releasing, sharing, storing or transferring Data Acceptable Data locations Providing for the security of Confidential Data and Operation Critical Data Assuring sound methods for handling, processing, security and disaster recovery of Data Assuring that Data are gathered, processed, shared and stored in accordance with the City privacy statement (to be written). Data Steward: The persons responsible for City functions and who determine Data Maintenance and Control Methods are Data Stewards. Electronic Data/Data: Distinct pieces of information, intentionally or unintentionally provided to the City in a variety of administrative, academic and business processes. This policy covers all Data stored on any electronic media, and within any computer systems defined as a City information technology resource. Mobile Computing Devices: Information technology resources of such devices include, but are not limited to, laptops, tablets, cell phones, smart phones, and other portable devices. Operation Critical Data: Data determined to be critical and essential to the successful operation of the City as a whole, and whose loss or corruption would cause a severe detrimental impact to continued operations. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:2 Page 17 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 106 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 425 of 810 Data receiving this classification require a high level of protection against accidental d istribution, exposure or destruction, and must be covered by high quality disaster recovery and business contin uity measures. Data in this category include Data stored on Enterprise Systems such as Data passed through networked communications systems. Such Data may be released or shared under defined, specific procedures for disclosure, such as departmental guidelines, documented procedures or policies. City Provided Data Systems: Information technology resources, as defined and described by the City and used for the storage, maintenance and processing of City Data. Unrestricted Data: Information that may be released or shared as needed. Usage/Data Use: Usage and Data Use are used interchangeably and are defined as gathering, viewing, storing, sharing, transferring, distributing, modifying, printing and otherwise acting to provide a Data maintenance environment. PROCEDURES: 1. Data Stewardship Data Stewards are expected to create, communicate and enforce Data Maintenance and Control Methods. Data Stewards are also expected to have knowledge of functions in their areas and the Data and information used in support of those functions. The Chief Information Officer(CIO) is ultimately accountable for the Data management and stewardship of all the City data. The CIO may appoint others in their respective areas of responsibility. 2. Data Maintenance and Control Method Data Stewards will develop and maintain Data Maintenance and Control Methods for their assigned systems. When authorizing and assigning access controls defined in the Data Maintenance and Control Methods involving Confidential Data and Operation Critical Data, Data Stewards will restrict user privileges to the least access necessary to perform job functions based on job role and res ponsibility. If the system is a City Provided Data System, City Technology Services will provide, upon request, guidance and services for the tasks identified in the Data Maintenance and Control Method. If the system is provided by a Public Cloud, the Data Steward must still verify that the Data Maintenance and Control Method used by the Public Cloud provider meets current City technology standards (to be written)?. Further, ongoing provisions for meeting current City technology and security standards (to be written)? must be included in the service contract. Review of Public Cloud solutions must include City Technology Services and City Attorney prior to final solution selection and purchase. Use of personal equipment to conduct City business must comply with all guidance provided by City policies to be written)?. 3. Data Custodianship Data Custodians will use Data in compliance with the established Data Maintenance and Control Method. Failure to process or handle Data in compliance with the established method for a system will be considered a violation of the City policies. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:2 Page 18 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 107 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 426 of 810 4. Data Usage In all cases, Data provided to the City will be used in accordance with the Privacy Statement (to be written) Software solutions, including SaaS solutions, are selected to manage Data and are procured, purchased and installed in conjunction with City (to be written) Data will be released in accordance with City (to be written). Requests for information from external agencies such as Freedom of Information Act requests, subpoenas, law enforcement agency requests, or any other request for Data from an external source) must be directed to the City Attorney and processed in accordance with existing policies. Standards for secure file transmissions, or Data exch anges, must be evaluated by the CIO when a system other than a City Provided Data System is selected or when a Public Cloud is utilized. Specific contract language may be required. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Unencrypted authorization and Data transmission are not acceptable. Communication of Confidential Data via end-user messaging technologies (i.e., email, instant messaging, chat or other communication methods) is prohibited 5. Storing Data Data cannot be stored on a system other than a City Provided Data System without the advance permission of the Data Steward and demonstrated legitimate need. Data should be stored in encrypted formats whenever possible. Confidential Data must be stored in encrypted formats. Encryption strategies should be reviewed with City Technology Services in advance to avoid accidental Data lockouts. Data cannot be stored on a City-provided Computing Device unless the device is encrypted without the advance permission of the Data Steward and demonstrated legitimate need. Data must be stored on devices and at locations approved by Data Stewards. If information technology resources (computers, printers and other items) are stored at an off-campus location, the location must be approved by Data Stewards prior to using such resources to store City Data. Technology enables the storage of Data on fax machines, copiers, cell phones, point-of-sale devices and other electronic equipment. Data Stewards are responsible for discovery of stored Data and removal of the Data prior to release of the equipment. When approving Mobile Computing Device Usage, Data Stewards must verify that those using Mobile Computing Devices can provide information about what Data was stored on the device (such as a cop y of the last backup) in the event the device is lost or stolen. In all cases, Data storage must comply with City retention policies. Data Usage in a Public Cloud system must have specific retention standards(to be written)? written in the service contract. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Provisions for the return of all City Data in the event of contract termination must be included in the contract, when Data is stored on a Public Cloud. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Current Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:2 Page 19 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 108 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 427 of 810 security standards (to be written)? (such as controlled access, personal firewalls, antivirus, fully updated and patched operating systems, etc.) will be evaluated when a system other than a City Provided Data System is selected and must be covered in contract language. The City Attorney must be consulted regarding such language. Data stored on Mobile Computing Devices must be protected by current security standard methods (such as controlled access, firewalls, antivirus, fully updated and patched operating systems, etc.). City standard procedures (to be written) for the protection and safeguarding of Confidential Data and Operation Critical Data must be applied equally and without exception to City Provided Data Systems, Mobile Computing Devices and systems other than City Provided Data Systems, such as Public Cloud solution. 6. Systems and network Data Systems and network Data, generated through systems or network administration, logs or other system recording activities, cannot be used, or captured, gathered, analyzed or disseminated, without the advance permission of the Chief Information Officer. 7. Value of Data In all cases where Data are to be processed through a Public Cloud, the following assessment must be d one: The value of the Data must be determined in some tangible way. Signature approval from the Data Steward’s division vice president or ap propriate party with the ability to authorize activity at the level of the value of the Data must be obtained. 8. Sanctions Failure to follow the guidelines contained in this document will be considered inappropriate use of a City information technology resource and therefore a violation of the City policy(to be written). 9. Data Security Breach Review Panel A Data Security Breach Review Panel (Panel) comprised of the following members will be established: o Chief Information Officer o Chief of Police o City Attorney o Chief Privacy Officer 10. Data Loss Prevention Software Define granular access rights for removable devices and peripheral ports and establish policies for users, computers and groups, maintaining productivity while enforcing device security 11. Audits All City owned equipment is subject to audit for unauthorized storage of regulated data. Devices authorized to store regulated data are subject to audits as deemed necessary by the CIO. Reasonable prior notification of an audit will be provided. Audit results are handled confidentially by Information Security staff and are reported to the CIO in aggregate. 12. Mobile Devices City owned mobile equipment will be exclusively allowed on the City’s primary network and use two factor authentication. All personal devices must use “guest” access if provided. Comments summary on <Public Comment - Stucky - 2022-08-29.pdf> Created on 8/29/2022 at 17:25:2 Page 20 Notes Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 109 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 428 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From: Sent:Tuesday, September 6, 2022 2:09 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Community input Warning: External Email To whom it may concern, I am a Chula Vista resident, home owner in Otay Ranch community since 2008, a working RN, married with 3 children. Me and my husband both support the increased monitoring in our city/community. We are happy that our hard earned tax dollars were spent to provide the drone first responder service to our CVPD. In my opinion the more eyes we have on our community the better, the safer our city community our neighborhoods will be. I do not care if I have camera’s on my house, drones flying over my backyard ext. That makes me and my children feel safer. Our neighborhood so far has been a very safe and family welcoming neighborhood- with kids walking and riding bike independently, seniors walking there dogs, parks without issues of homelessness or petty crime, absence of graffiti ext. So I trust our CVPD to use the monitor technology at there will- whatever they have been doing so far has been working great. Keep up the good work for people like me and my family CVPD! Gina Velasco Zip 91913 Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 110 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 429 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Eric Wood < Sent:Sunday, August 28, 2022 10:03 PM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Subject:Feedback on DRAFT Policy Recommendations Hello, My name is Eric Wood and I am a resident of Chula Vista. In the past, I was the Police Technology Manager and Smart Technology Officer for the City of Chula Vista. I currently have no official or formal relationship or role with the city aside from being a resident and former employee. I have spent over 20 years as a technology consultant, much of that was under the employment of Microsoft. I have also worked in the public sector driving technology innovation, security and compliance. I hold CISSP and CCSP credentials for information system security. I’m currently employed by a private sector firm which helps law enforcement gain insights from their existing data systems; which are often separated in vendor, departmental or technology silos. I’m accustomed to dealing with very sensitive data sets and security compliance that must meet FBI standards (CJIS) and NIST:800-53. I have attended several of the task force meetings at the Council Chambers and the public engagement event at the Otay Ranch Library. With that background, let me offer you some of my feedback after reviewing the DRAFT Policy Recommendations that the task force has published for comment. General Feedback: As a whole, I believe that the task force is misguided with their approach in several aspects. It is my opinion that the purpose of the task force was to propose policies or practices for the purpose of establishing safe and reasonable protections against the misuse or abuse of Personally Identifiable Information within the city. However, what I notice in the discussions at meetings and within the proposed policies and practices is a much more controlling or gating role in city operations born from a foundation of mistrust. I will provide some specific examples to support this observation. This DRAFT policy recommendations document reads as if this was a Surveillance Task Force. There are 68 occurrences of the word ‘Surveillance’ in the document. Please consider the impression that your language will leave on the public and be leveraged by the media to create negative connotations that are unwarranted in my opinion. The focus should be on data privacy protections…yes surveillance systems are an element of privacy protections but the systems this task force is aware of and have described as surveillance systems include the Police Drones and LPR cameras, neither of which collect identifiable information…you would have to take information from those and have access and cause to search another system in order to make any identification….and that’s not identifying the occupants…just the registered owner. My ask here is for the task force to rebalance the language used with the purpose and real risk that exists today to privacy. An ongoing PAB would keep those in check down the road…but I believe this heavy lean on the use of surveillance is not warranted and does not serve the city or the citizens. It’s unnecessarily alarming and if you outline these to the average citizen, as has been done for each of you, they would agree that it’s been overblown. Specific Points of Feedback: Section 1.A.II through 1.A.IV – The language used here implies (based on other language and open discussion at the task force meetings) that the Policy Advisory Board (will review Use Policies, Data Sharing Agreements and new technology- related contracts) in a gating function…meaning if the outcome of the review is not satisfactory then some delay or denial will occur as a result. In reality, Use Policies, Data Sharing Agreements and Contracts are all discoverable and there’s no need to include this within the recommendations unless the intent is for the PAB to act as a gating function. The PAB should absolutely review those and provide any recommended changes to the city manager’s office Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 111 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 430 of 810 2 and the CISO. The PAB will not have the requisite background and training in Federal, State and Local laws on contracting, interagency collaboration, mutual-aid and jurisdiction. I recommend clarifying that these types of documents may be reviewed along with other established (not proposed, planned or work-in-progress) policies, practices and contracts, just as any member of the public is able to. Section 5 – I strongly disagree with the recommendation for a Chief Privacy Officer. Managing and being accountable for data privacy is included in the discipline and profession of a Chief Information Security Officer. Data is both an asset and a liability. If PII data is not adequately protected against misuse, abuse, manipulation, denial of access or unwanted disclosure then this is an Information Security problem. How many other cities that are comparable to Chula Vista do you see with a Chief Privacy Officer? This would be an anomaly and it’s poorly envisioned in my opinion. I would not be surprised if this recommendation was not supported by the City Manager. If what you are concerned about is that there is clear accountability and job focus, then a more preferred approach in my opinion would be to recommend that the CISO must personally report progress/challenges regarding Data Privacy to the City Attorney and Risk Management Officer and in order to conduct the desired level of internal audits, investigations of practices not aligned with policy, then an analyst position should be created to perform the discovery, monitoring and reporting of data privacy related activities, developments, areas of non-compliance to the CISO. The CISO must be capable of managing the city’s cybersecurity posture and strike a balance between usability for city functions and security and compliance for risk management. The CISO should have direct oversight of external audits or vendors which may periodically augment the data privacy or cyber security functions. Section 11 – Internal data sharing between city departments should be encouraged. This is actually a core competency that underpins smart-cities and more effective/efficient government services. The Data owner is ultimately the department head that is deciding the if, who, what, where, when, how and why they would share their departments data with another city department. Are there concerns about oversharing or how the information will be utilized by the other city department, absolutely. But I guarantee that those city department heads and their senior managers will work through those details. I know this because I was involved in the example used by the task force. The ‘informal sharing agreement’ between Traffic Engineering and the Police Department. I directly led this effort from the PD by requesting access from Traffic Engineering. The Distinguished Traffic Engineer went directly to the department head to seek authorization. We outlined use cases, permissions, authorized personnel, etc. This was handled in email, phone calls and face-to-face meetings. To what degree of formality does the task force desire department heads to work together to save the taxpayer money while also improving service delivery? The video management system that enabled this sharing was under the control of the Data Owner and the permissions and audit logs assured that only the agreed upon people and permissions were utilized. This is another area where the Task Force is over-stepping what is being asked….describe the safe-guards you would like to see, don’t inject a review process and a board that bogs down good public service leaders making responsible decisions. Please focus on transparency and trust…let periodic audits by the CISO verify that the safety measures are having the desired effect. Section 12 – External data sharing between the city and third parties must be approved through a formal, auditable process that includes the PAB? Data is shared with 3rd party agencies and entities on a regular basis and cannot be gated by the PAB who doesn’t meet often enough or have a working understanding of the nature of the data sharing. The Police Department shares data with investigators from other agencies in the region and with the District Attorney’s office. Traffic engineering collect non-identifiable data on traffic flow and patterns based on cell phones passing by various points on surface streets and that data can be shared with 3rd parties to help inform commuters where there is congestion so that they can choose an alternate/faster route. This section of your recommendations needs significant revision in my opinion and frankly, I would focus on requiring that the data owners document the current practices sharing of Identifiable data to 3rd parties, rather than submitting all data sharing to 3rd parties for review. I would also like to add some insight to the example the task force used in section 12 with regard to the sharing of LPR data with law enforcement agencies that should not have had access to it. I suspect the task force is not aware that this was a result of a software user interface design flaw which I, as the Police Technology Manager at the time, had reported to the vendor. The vendor said it was not a bug and it was by design. If so, it was a design to trick people into clicking a ‘Yes’ button about data sharing broadly right after a typical prompt appears during user login where clicking ‘Yes’ is necessary to continue into the platform. The look and feel between the two dialogs was nearly identical yet the impact of clicking Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 112 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 431 of 810 3 the second ‘Yes’ button was dramatically different than the first. We had no leverage to force the vendor to change the behavior and it was inevitable that a user would Click ‘Yes’ twice in order to get into the platform to do their job. There was no alert email to indicate that this sharing was enabled. It was a horrible design but it is not a reason to throw shame on the city and employ some level of oversight that wouldn’t have prevented the sharing or detected in for perhaps months. Allowing the city to have legal language in the contract to terminate at our convenience if the vendor is putting our data privacy/sharing policies in jeopardy would have resolved this. I defer to the City attorney’s office for the best way to proceed. Section 22 – In general, I agree with this section as it’s also already supported by California Privacy laws and is therefore redundant and unnecessary to include in your recommendations. This section should be more about tracking and reporting on compliance with existing applicable laws and statutes and less about trying to implement what you believed to be new technical controls. I also wanted to take a moment to highlight that last sentence of 22.a which should include LPR data as a type of data collection that a person cannot reasonably opt-out of. And for the same reason, why signage of ‘surveillance cameras in use’ should not be posted as it gives an improper expectation that if they are nowhere near one of those signs, they are not subject to LPR cameras which would generate plate reads that are available to the city (which I believe is the intent based on conversation at a public meeting of the task force). Commercial vehicles such as tow trucks, garbage trucks and HOA owned LPR cameras are everywhere and moving constantly. That’s technically where most of the license plate reads come from that all law enforcement agencies utilize to investigate crimes that have occurred. A reasonable control to request for LPR systems is that whenever a search of LPR data is done by authorized personnel, the reason for the search must include a CAD incident number or a crime case number. This would make audits of the approved use of LPR data much more usable in terms of finding abuses/misuses. I am happy to take calls and meetings to respond to any of my comments here. But I also know that each of you are also very busy and so I understand that I will likely hear nothing in response. I do empathize with each of you. You have volunteered to do a job that you only discover the challenges in doing it well once you’re already in the midst of it. I know that you all have great intentions but I do encourage you to take a trust but verify approach rather than mistrust and review approach. The city has done nothing to deserve that posture. Best Regards, Eric Wood Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 113 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 432 of 810 1 Jeremy Ogul From:Jim Zuffoletto < > Sent:Sunday, September 18, 2022 11:07 AM To:privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov Cc:Rkennedy@chulavistapd.org; pcollum@chulavistapd.org Subject:Summary of Policy Recommendations Members of the Privacy Task Force Let me preface my remarks by thanking you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Summary of Policy Recommendations. My comments are limited to the application of these recommendations as they impact law enforcement and more specifically the CVPD, Sheriff and National City. I speak from a background in law and law enforcement having been a sworn member of the CVPD and SDSO and a licensed attorney representing clients in various area of civil litigation. I served on the 2021-22 County Grand Jury where my Law and Justice committee examined and extensively studied the issue of privacy rights and the impact of surveillance and modern technology on the public. The 2021-2022 Grand Jury published its findings and recommendations which can be found at: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/grandjury. That being said, the recommendations being proposed are, I believe, incomplete and present potential serious issues concerning public welfare and safety. The Privacy Advisory Board should have nine members, at least two-thirds of whom are Chula Vista residents.” It is no surprise that the authors specifically left out inclusion of representatives from law enforcement and victim’s rights advocates. The special interest groups, working under the guise of the San Diego TRUST coalition, drafted and presented the exact same recommendations for the City of San Diego. One only need look at the composition of that group to understand the real purpose behind their agenda. Best practices studies show that “city council decisions are more likely to be seen as fair and considerate if all people having a stake in the outcome” are involved. Asking nine people, none of whom have any experience in law enforcement, to make recommendations on what is acceptable use of a piece of modern technology is like asking a jury of nine to determine guilt or innocents after hearing testimony and seeing evidence from only one party to a case. At the August meeting of the Advisory group, a member of TRUST stated they were only interested in being sure that all members of the community were represented. That being said, it appears TRUST does not view law enforcement or victims of crime to be part of the Chula Vista community. Using that as background, and as mentioned earlier, it is my opinion the recommendations fail to address serious concerns unique to law enforcement. Sharing of information with neighboring law enforcement agencies Warning: External Email Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 114 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 433 of 810 2 The CVPD works closely with the SDSO, which serves the unincorporated area of Bonita, and with the NCPD. The departments are often called upon to assist each other. This close symbiotic working relationship often requires sharing of information by each organization. That need for sharing must be recognized and incorporated within the guidelines the advisory board works with and in collaboration with outside agencies and must be considered when recommending any rules on sharing surveillance or the use of equipment, i.e.; drones. Law Enforcement Consultation and Contribution Along the same lines, often, the use of surveillance technology as it specifically applies to law enforcement cannot be adequately explained by a non-law enforcement lay person. Hence, any recommendations concerning use of technology must include specific and articulable rationale from the CVPD (or other L.E. sources) as to the appropriateness of the board’s recommendation. If necessary, provisions should be included allowing such presentation to be made in a closed-door session with city council, city attorney, city manager, mayor, and privacy director. Cooperation and contribution with State and Federal Authorities In addition, the CVPD has officers assigned to, and cross-sworn with, various state and federal agencies and task forces such as FBI, DEA, HSA, etc. In their roles, secret and sensitive information must be shared. Any attempt to quash that sharing might jeopardize further participation by CVPD personnel and affect public safety. Clarification with regard to sharing of such data should be included. Once again, this will require input from high level members of the city administration and the CVPD, Secrecy and Confidentiality Finally, I see no provision for discussion of sensitive material among the advisory board members. Secrecy should be addressed and required as it is with the members of the grand jury. All members must be held to a strict level of confidentiality and subject to fines or prosecution for violating their oath. I would like to present further discussion at the upcoming meeting and will request the same in a separate writing. Thank you again, James M. Zuffoletto, Esq. (Ret) Virus-free.www.avast.com Written comments received by Task Force 4/25/22 - 9/26/22: Page 115 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 434 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Poll 4/25/2022 Prepared for the City of Chula Vista Field Dates: March 21 - 30, 2022 Chula Vista residents n=607 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 435 of 810 Page ii Table of Contents SUMMARY 1 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS 2 OVERVIEW 3 METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS 4 FINDINGS 6 QUESTIONNAIRE WITH PERCENTAGES 32 NOTES TO THE CROSSTABULATIONS 41 CROSSTABULATIONS 42 VERBATIM RESPONSES TO Q8 Appendix A VERBATIM RESPONSES TO Q10 Appendix B VERBATIM RESPONSES TO Q16 Appendix C VERBATIM RESPONSES TO Q18 Appendix D SPANISH LANGUAGE QUESTIONAIRE Appendix E TAGALOG LANGAUGE QUESTIONAIRE Appendix F 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 436 of 810 Page 1 Summary Research Objective: 1) Estimate resident approval of drone program 2) Estimate resident approval of automated license plate reader program 3) Understand opinion dynamics 4) Measure opinions of program benefits and concerns Sample Size: n=607 Margin of Sampling Error: ± 4% Confidence Level: 95% Sample Methodology: Simple Random Sampling from Listed Sample Jurisdiction: City of Chula Vista Eligibility: Adult residents Interview Method: Telephone (cell and landline), e-mail push-to-web, text push-to-web Average Duration: 12 minutes, 36 seconds Field Dates: March 21 - 30, 2022 Field Facility: Competitive Edge Research, San Diego Project Director: John Nienstedt, Sr. Research Analyst: Rachel Lawler Research Assistant: James Iwu Questions about these data should be directed to: Mr. John Nienstedt, Sr. President Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 702-2372 John@cerc.net 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 437 of 810 Page 2 Sample Characteristics GENDER % Male 49.0 Female 51.0 AGE % 18-24 12.0 25-34 19.0 35-44 19.0 45-54 19.0 55-64 15.0 65+ 16.0 LANGAUGE % English 82.5 Spanish 17.0 Tagalog 0.5 ETHNICITY % Hispanic or Latino 51.3 White or Caucasian 22.6 Asian or Pacific Islander 15.2 Black or African American 2.6 Native American 0.2 Multi-ethnic 7.7 Something else 0.3 INCOME % < $25,000 6.8 $25 to 40,000 9.5 $40 to 60,000 13.3 $60 to 80,000 13.6 $80 to 100,000 15.1 $100 to $150,000 23.6 > $150,000 18.1 VOTER REGISTRATION % Voter 77.6 Non-Voter 22.4 ZIP CODE % 91911 35.4 91910 32.2 91913 15.6 91915 8.6 91914 5.7 91902 2.5 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 438 of 810 Page 3 Overview Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. (CERC) is very pleased to present the results of this study to the City of Chula Vista. This survey was designed to estimate resident approval of the drone and automated license plate reader programs, understand the opinion dynamics underlying approval, and measure resident opinions of the benefits and concerns related to each program. To meet these goals, the survey also measured certain demographic characteristics and attitudes of the respondents. All opinions in this report are the professional judgments of CERC. The project director was CERC president John Nienstedt. The questionnaire was principally designed by Nienstedt with input from senior management staff at the City of Chula Vista and Jim Madaffer of Madaffer Enterprises. The data were analyzed by Nienstedt and Research Analyst Rachel Lawler, and the report was prepared by CERC Research Assistant James Iwu. Editing, coding, computer processing and tabulation of the data were done at CERC’S San Diego office. The computer tabulations were produced using SPSS PC+ version 25.0, a statistical package copyrighted by SPSS, Inc. The maps were produced using eSpatial. This survey is strictly the property of the City of Chula Vista and its agents. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 439 of 810 Page 4 Methodology and Limitations S A M P L E M ET H O D O LO G Y The sample was comprised of Chula Vista voters and adult non-registrants, and was provided to CERC by L2. Competitive Edge additionally enhanced the sample via CSS Direct, a leading information appending service. The poll was administered from CERC’s El Paso, Texas, research facility in English and Spanish and from CERC’s corporate headquarters in San Diego in Tagalog from March 21 through 30, 2022, among a random sample of 607 Chula Vista residents. Phone calls were placed to landline and mobile phone numbers, texts were sent to mobile phone numbers and email invitations were sent to r andom samples of residents. Each contact method invited sampled residents to participate in a survey conducted by Competitive Edge Research. Those reached by text and email were provided a link to the website with the questionnaire. Reminder emails and texts were sent to non-responding residents and an opt-out link was provided for those not wishing to receive further email invitations. Reminder calls were placed to non-responding residents. The Tagalog language portion of the project was conducted by a bilingual interviewer who called randomly sampled residents tagged by the sample provider as Tagalog speakers. CERC attempted to reach Tagalog speakers on three different days over twelve hours. Training and calling started on March 25, 2022, with one hour dedicated to training and four hours dedicated to calling. One survey was completed from that effort. March 28, 2022, marked the second day of Tagalog interviews , and four hours were spent calling with one complete garnered from our efforts. March 29,2022 was the final day of calling and one survey was completed in four hours of calling. T H E W E IG H T IN G PR O C ED UR E Post-stratification weights were applied to align the resident sample to population characteristics of Chula Vista residents. The adjustment of a sample to match a population on specific sub -groups, called “poststratification,” is accomplished by multiplying the count in each sub -group by a number called a weight. This weight is defined as the ratio of its proportion of the total population to its proportion of the sample. To apply the adjustment to all measurements derived from a dataset, the weight value is attached to each individual case . M A R GIN O F S A M P LIN G ER R O R According to statistical theory, the confidence level associated with a sample of this type is such that, with a question where the respondents answer 50% "yes" and 50% "no," 95% of the time the results are within plus or 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 440 of 810 Page 5 minus ±4% of the true value, where true value refers to the results obtained if it were possible to interview every possible adult resident. The degree of sampling error is reduced when responses have larger (e.g. 60%- 40%, 70%-30%) percentage differences. Conversely, the margin of error increases when a subset of the entire 607 responses is analyzed. A V O I D IN G B I AS In addition to error introduced by sampling variability, there are many other possible sources of bias such as how a question is worded, the question sequence, or individual interviewer techniques. Competitive Edge does everything in its power to minimize these potential sources of bias. Systematic position bias occurs when the order in which a series of questions is asked influences the respondent’s answers to those the questions. In instances where systematic bias might occur, the order of the questions was randomized to eliminate systematic position bias in the aggregate. The order of questions within the batteries Q4-Q5, Q11-Q12, Q13-Q14, Q19-Q20 and Q21-Q22 were randomized. Another potential for systematic position bias exists when batteries of questions are not rotated. This would lead to respondents possibly being influenced by the most recent set of questions they heard. Therefore, supporter and opponent batteries we re rotated to eliminate systematic position bias in the aggregate. A SN AP SH O T IN T I M E A survey of this type is a good measure of current attitudes that may change over time. This survey should not necessarily serve as an unqualified predictor of events, but as an indicator as to the situation in late-March 2022. C AT E GO R IZ IN G V ER B AT I M R E S PO N S E S T O O PEN -EN D ED Q U E ST IO N S Q8, Q10, Q16, and Q18 were asked in an open-ended fashion and was subsequently coded for ease of analysis. Codes were created to best represent the information that was given in the verbatim responses with like terms being grouped together. For a code to be created, the categorization of responses must represent a minimum of one percent of all verbatim responses. All remaining “uncodable” verbatim responses subsequently remained coded as “Other.” However, this does not include “Unsure,” where the respondent could not give an answer. G E O C O D IN G AN D M APP IN G F O R C H U LA V I ST A The geocoding for the Chula Vista dataset was performed using eSpatial. eSpatial incorporates a GPS Locator, which combines complete mapping and analysis software with the latest Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver. By linking eSpatial with the addresses that match each respondent, the software defined and rendered zip code regions on the map. Segments were also created, analyzed, and evaluated by geography with eSpatial. All the respondents were successfully geocoded. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 441 of 810 Page 6 Findings Background Women slightly outnumber men in the City of Chula Vista and residents’ ages run the gamut, with 31% being younger than 35 and the same percentage being older than 54. Chula Vista is a very ethnically diverse city. Latino residents make up about half the city’s population, Whites are at 22%, Asian/Pacific Islanders are at 15% and another 8% are ethnically mixed. On the other hand, only 3% are Black or African American. Latinos and multi-race residents are frequently younger than 35, while Whites are often seniors; most Asian/Pacific Islanders fall between the ages of 35 and 54. Spanish language respondents account for 17% of our sample. Another 34% of the sample are Latino but took the survey in English. Spanish language respondents are typically age 55 o r older; none of the Spanish interviews were completed with residents younger than 35. There is a wide range of incomes, with 15% in households earning less than $40,000 annually while a sizable 38% are in households with six- figure incomes. Most in this higher income bracket are 35 and older, and they are more often White or Asian/Pacific Islander. Conversely, the lowest-income residents – those earning less than $25,000 annually – are disproportionately seniors, and 84% are Latino, with more than half taking the survey in Spanish. Very few in this category are of Asian/Pacific Islanders. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 442 of 810 Page 7 Voter Registration Seventy-eight percent of the residents are registered to vote. Registered voters are more often men than women and less likely to be Hispanic or Latino. Geography For the purposes of this study, we classify and analyze respondents both by their ZIP code as well as five geographic areas we identified. ZIP Code At 35%, the 91911 ZIP code in the southwest houses the largest share of residents. This is a heavily Latino area with few White residents, and more than one-in-five took the survey in Spanish suggesting a substantial number of non- or minimal-English speakers living here. There are fewer higher income households, and two-thirds earn between $25,000 and $100,000 annually. Voter registration is also lower, as just 71% are registered. The 91910 ZIP code is home to 32% of the residents and contains the city’s northwest communities. More Whites and fewer Asian/Pacific Islanders call this area home. Like the neighboring ZIP code to the south, this is a poorer area and one-in-ten earn less than $25,000 a year. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 443 of 810 Page 8 Sixteen percent live in the 91913 ZIP code which hugs the west side of State Route 125. Residents here are more often middle-age and 61% are men. At 27%, there is a substantial Asian/Pacific Islander population, while Latinos are underrepresented compared to the entire city. This is an affluent area with two -thirds in homes earning more than $100,000 a year. The 91915 ZIP code on the far east side contains Lower Otay Lake and 9% of Chula Vista residents. It is another upper-income area, with 62% earning six-figures. Six percent reside in the 91914 ZIP code, to the north of 91915. The area has the highest Asian/Pacific Islander community in Chula Vista at 34%, although all these respondents took the survey in English, so it is either their native language or they have a significant command of it and prefer to use it in formal communication. More than seven-in-ten residents earn upwards of $100,000 annually. A small 3% are in the 91902 ZIP code, which is, generally speaking, the community of Bonita. Nearly half the folks here are White, and it is the most affluent of all, with 80% netting at least $100,000 per year. Geographic Area The Northwest contains downtown Chula Vista and the area of north Chula Vista and is home to Chula Vista Police Headquarters. It stretches from the I-5 freeway in the west to the I-805 in the east, while SR-54 and J Street mark its northern and southern borders, respectively. Twenty-nine percent of the residents live in this section. The area has more White and young adult residents than elsewhere, while men, Asian, and multi -race locals are in shorter supply. Most live in households with incomes of at leas t $60,000. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 444 of 810 Page 9 Twenty-eight percent dwell in the Southwestern portion of the city spanning from Otay Valley Regional Park in the south to J Street in the north and is flanked by the I -805 and I-5 to the east and west. Harborside and Otay are the area’s primary communities. This area has the largest Latino constituency in Chula Vista, and 29% took the survey in Spanish. White and Asian residents each account for only one-tenth of the population, while higher income households are also less common. Sixteen percent of residents are in North Central Chula Vista. Bonita acts as the area’s northern boundary, and Rancho del Rey as its southern boundary, with I-805 to the west and SR-125 to the east. The area is affluent, and most folks earn more than $100,000 annually. Residents are more likely to be men, and 2% took the survey in Tagalog, so that language is more prevalent here. South Central Chula Vista occupies the areas of Otay Ranch and Sunbow to the north while the county landfill sits on the southern perimeter. SR-125 acts as the eastern borderline, and I-805 does the same in the west. Fourteen percent of Chula Vistans call this area their home and they are often middle-age and disproportionately of Asian heritage. A large 64% are upper-income earners, and, at 88%, voter registration rates are the best in the city. Lastly, 13% live in East Chula Vista which is comprised of Rolling Hills Ranch in the north and the lion’s share of Eastlake in the south. SR-125 is its western edge while the Otay Reservoir serves as the geographical eastern boundary. One-in-four residents are of Asian descent – the largest cohort in the city – and earning more than $100,000 a year is the norm. Protection of Personal Information When asked how confident residents are that the City of Chula Vista keeps their personal information safe and private, the results show the city outperforming both the federal government and online businesses like Facebook and Amazon. However, fewer than one-in-ten are extremely confident any of these entities maintain confidentiality, so the vast majority of residents have some reservations regarding the protection of their private data. Fifty-six percent express at least some confidence in Chula Vista’s capabilities, which i s far better than the 35% who say the same about online businesses. Fifty-three percent believe the same about the federal government. Only 14% say they are not at all confident in Chula Vista’s privacy measures, which compares favorably to a substantial 40% for online businesses and 21% for the federal government. We can say that, in the eyes of 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 445 of 810 Page 10 residents, the City far surpasses online businesses and somewhat surpasses the federal government when it comes to maintaining the confidentiality of personal information. That said, sentiment even related to Chula Vista is not solid. Improvements, more so among men, could be made. Trust in the Chula Vista Police Department Trust in the Chula Vista Police Department varies but is somewhat better than levels of trust in “police officers” recorded by Pew Research nationwide in late-2021. Nearly 30% place a lot of trust in the local police department to implement policies that are in the best interests of the public, which compares favorably to 20% nationally. On the other side of the spectrum, 21% say “not much” and another 5% have no confidence at all. That total of 26% is less than the 31% among adults across the United States. At 43%, the most common response is that the Chula Vistans trust their police department “somewhat.” White residents older than 31 put the greatest trust in the police, with a sizeable 48% saying they trust the department a lot and an additional one-third saying they trust it somewhat. Their non-White counterparts aren’t necessarily distrusting but their positive views are more tempered. Conversely, 44% of younger residents, regardless of race or ethnicity, have serious doubts about trusting the police department. With varying degrees of trust present in the bulk of the population, the Department should expect their decisions to be met with some skepticism from many residents, especially those younger than 31. Therefore, efforts should be made bolster trust in the police among younger Chula Vistans, and older non-whites to some extent. Civic Mood Unlike many locales in California, residents of Chula Vista are fairly upbeat, although not strongly so. About 53% say things in Chula Vista are going in the right direction, but only one-in-six strongly believe that. Latino men in the Southwest are more often positive about Chula Vista’s trajectory, with 23% feeling it is strongly going in the right direction. On the other hand, 27% say things are on the wrong track, but most of that is not intensely negative. Non-Hispanic men are the most dissatisfied, with a hefty 45% saying the city is on the wrong track. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 446 of 810 Page 11 However, with residents being twice as likely to express positive than negative opinions, Chula Vista’s current optimism ratio sits at 2:1, meaning the status quo is satisfactory at present although not overwhelmingly so. One-in-five believe things are mixed or are unsure how to answer the question. Although not directly connected to Chula Vista, record-high inflation and international security concerns are undoubtedly affectin g many residents’ moods, so it’s unsurprising to find some uncertainty swirling. Exposure to Drone Use Information When asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the City of Chula Vista’s use of drones for law enforcement purposes, 55% answered “nothing” or “don’t know” so the program is flying under most people’s radar. Women living in the 91911 ZIP code and men in the Southwest are at an even larger deficit when it comes to knowing about the drones. If the Department wants to build familiarity with its drone usage, efforts to spread the word are warranted with special attention paid to 91911 and the Southwest area of the city. Answers vary among those who could recall information and were typically neutral in nature, indicating folks are generally 1) not being exposed to positive or negative information about the drones, or 2) not remembering this type of information if they have been exposed to it. The negative information isn’t widespread, but the program is also not getting much positive coverage. Thirteen percent simply remember that “the police use drones.” Vague answers such as “I have heard about the program,” and “that they have the drones and that they are available for certain situations,” represent the type of responses in this category. This imprecise – but at least not negative - - answer is more common among residents age 37 and older. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 447 of 810 Page 12 Nine percent have had a personal experience with the drones or seen them flying overhead. Examples of responses from residents in this bucket include, “I have seen them in action and read that they are very effective in surveillance,” “I saw a drone being used in a Bonita neighborhood about two years ago when someone was holding someone hostage with a gun,” and “I’ve seen them around and heard that the police were utilizing them, and they were flying over my house.” Although some respondents indicate they are unhappy with the presence of the drones, most answers in this category are either positive or impartial. Those in the Northwest – where the Department’s Headquarters are located – report more personal experience than others. Privacy and surveillance concerns were mentioned by only 6%. One person commented “I don't think drones should be used anywhere and should not be allowed to have cameras I’ve se en neighborhood stories of people being spied on with them,” while others stated, “they are using the drones to spy on people” and “it appears to be used in a random fashion i.e., surveying house parties during the day.” Several of these folks are worried about the drones being a Chinese threat, with one saying, “I have and am very concerned that China provides them and could easily hack into the drones.” Women who trust the Chula Vista Police “not much” or “not at all” are more than twice as likely to offer up this answer than are other residents. Clarifying the specific situations in which the drones are used, where the drones are manufactured, and where and how the data is stored may help alleviate some of these tensions. Another 5% had read or seen news stories about the drones and this ambiguous response is more frequent among Asian residents, 18% of whom gave this answer. “Read online news when the city first announced the drone program” and “I saw it on television there was a news report that it would be used for first responders and 911 calls” represent the types of answers given. The remaining categories each account for less than 5% of answers given. If local media features and stories on the drones, demonstrations at community events, and personal stories from residents who benefit from the program have been promoted, their value has been limited so far. Current Sentiment Related to the Drone Program Residents express a lot of approval for the Chula Vista Police Department’s use of drones. More than three quarters give it the thumbs up, 42% strongly. Only 17% currently disapprove of the program. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 448 of 810 Page 13 Why? There are two ways to understand the opinion dynamics surrounding an issue. One way is to ask respondents directly why they approve or disapprove of a program, in this case the Chula Vista Police Department’s use of drones for law enforcement purposes. The other way is through a statistical process called multiple regression analysis. Main Reason for Approval of the Drone Program When we ask residents who approve of the drones the main reason for their position, two rationales top the list and are mentioned by 20% each – “police and public safety” and “crime scene monitoring and surveillance.” Answers in the first category can be summed up by one supporter’s comment: “to keep the community and the officers that protect us safe.” These approvers view the drones as a way to help keep residents and officers out of harm’s way when responding to potentially dangerous situations. Such reasoning is more common among men – especially those who strongly approve of the program. Approving women age 43 and older also give this reason more frequently. “Crime scene monitoring and surveillance” is a popular response among residents younger than 38 who approve of the drones, as one- third give this rationale. “You can get a view of what is going on when a crime is being committed from a birds eye view from the air so you’ll see things that you wouldn’t normally see” and “I feel like it can be beneficial in terms of giving law enforcement and fire fighter personnel a better idea of the environment they’re going into” are common themes emerging from supporters who offered up this answer. Another 18% approve because they see the drones as aiding in police investigations. One resident appreciated that “it gives extra evidence,” while another commented “I think it would be helpful if they wouldn’t have to send a live person they could still get valuable evidence while investigating a crime.” At 27%, drone supporters living in the city’s Northwest highlight this reasoning more often than others. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 449 of 810 Page 14 “Finding missing persons and criminals” rises to the top for 7%, and non-voters who approve of the program are twice as likely to give this reasoning than are approvers overall. Apprehending suspects was a focus for many in this bucket – “It will provide better and faster info for the police to catch the bad guys” – although locating non- offenders was certainly not an afterthought. One respondent noted “it could be used to find lost children or abducted children” while another recalled a personal experience saying, “I have an elderly friend of mine that was gone, and we couldn’t find him, and they found him with the drone and probably saved his life.” Spotlighting personal stories and examples like this in public outreach efforts may help residents to reconsider the benefits of drones outside of their law enforcement purposes. Drones acting as a replacement for helicopters topped the list for 6% of approvers. Associated cost savings were a big focus for this group, with folks saying, “it’s cheaper than a helicopter but it is the same thing” and “using helicopters is really high cost which is a waste of money; drone maintenance is really cheap compared with helicopters and the city has to save money and reduce taxes.” Five percent approve of the drones because they “improve response time” and this is a more popular answer among men than women. Examples of responses from these supporters include, “hopefully it will target criminals faster and police can respond to 911 calls faster” and “it allows law enforcement to quickly and more accurately respond to criminal activity.” Another 5% see the drones as a “useful tool/technology.” Those who strongly approve of the program and reside outside of the 91910 ZIP code are twice as likely to cite this as their main reason for approving of the drones. “Drones are another tool to fight crime,” and “research has demonstrated that drones can be used in a variety of helpful ways; we should take advantage of the ways that benefit Chula Vista” sum up the overarching sentiment of this cohort. The rest of the rationales account for smaller portions of the app roval pie. Main Reason for Disapproval of the Drone Program When we ask those who disapprove of the program the main reason for their position, privacy concerns and the potential for police/government misuse top the list. Forty-two percent cite privacy worries as their primary objection, so this will be the Department’s chief hurdle to overcome when trying to improve buy-in among the 16% of residents who currently disapprove of drone use. The bulk of people in this bucket expressed some degree of concern about the drones watching and recording their private lives: “I think personal privacy in gatherings makes it feel like you’re being watched even if you’re not breaking the law in general you feel watched,” and “I think that it violates people’s right to privacy in their homes and yards.” Frequently reminding folks that drones are only used to respond to active incidents, not to look for crime or spy on residents in their homes, may help assuage some of this anxiety. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 450 of 810 Page 15 One-third think the drones will be misused by the government or police, with worries ranging from “concern for privacy; constitutional rights of privacy and overreach of government; it’s very different from license plates and tracking criminals; we have lost too many private property rights” to “it is none of their business; stay out of my backyard; I don’t believe in a police state.” Eleven percent say drones are a waste of resources with one respondent replying, “I’m not sure the purpose and usage is worth the resources utilized.” We use a statistical technique called multiple regression analysis to discern which factors drive approval and disapproval for the department’s use of drones. Not only does this technique serve to remove distractive variables from consideration, but it also orders the opinion drivers by their importance. There are seven drivers of approval and disapproval for the use of drones. 1) Trust in the Police Department Breeds Approval -- Opinions of the drone program center largely on how much trust residents place in the Chula Vista Police Department’s adoption of policies that are in the public's best interest. Almost all who report a lot of trust approve of the program, with more than 60% registering strong approval. Among those who somewhat trust the police to adopt policies benefitting the public, approval remains very widespread, with nearly 80% on the positive side, but not as intense. Even most who do not trust the police “much” widely approve of the program, but approval among them is much more qualified and nearly 30% of these moderately distrusting folks disapprove of the drones. At the bottom of the trust scale, we find a complete lack of trust leads to strong disapproval for the program. Analysis clearly indicates that avoiding opposition to, and building support for, the drone program is generally a matter of the system's operators – the police -- having at least a modicum of the public's trust. When trust is 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 451 of 810 Page 16 absent, the drone is highly controversial. Fortunately for Chula Vista's program, relativ ely few residents seriously distrust the police, while drones themselves -- regardless of their use case -- seem to be popular. Of course, if something occurred to substantially tarnish the police department, approval of the drone program would sink. 2) Opinions Partly Depend on What Residents Have Seen/Read/Heard -- With a fair amount of information out there on the drone program, we have a pretty good picture of what translates into positive and negative sentiment. The analysis reveals that simply hearing about the police using drones and that the program is in place contributes to approval. There is also evidence that news stories have been beneficial. On the other hand, seeing, reading, or hearing about privacy issues or surveillance tends to make residents suspicious. With exposure to this type of message contained to only 6% of the population, the drone program is, by and large, supported. 3) Far More Support Among Residents Older Than 46 -- Not only do 84% of residents older than 46 approve of the drone program, but more than half strongly support it. While widespread approval exists even among those 46 and younger, it’s lukewarm and nearly a quarter of those residents do disapprove of the drone program. A closer look at what older Chula Vistans see in the program and what disturbs the younger voters reveals the former emphasize the benefits of public and police safety and the latter, while exhibiting privacy concerns and the potential for misuse, are also somewhat prone to regarding the system as a waste of resources. None of the older residents expressed that concern. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 452 of 810 Page 17 4) Support Increases as Income Decreases -- Very low-income residents making less than $25,000 annually are "all in" on the drone program. Our survey had difficulty identifying low income residents who do not approve, and the lower income earners elevate finding missing persons as part of their rationale for overwhelming support. Approval comes off its ultrahigh levels among residents in the vast $25,000 to $100,000 category. Still, only 13% of those residents actually disapprove of the drone program. Even most high-income individuals in households earning more than $100,000 approve, but support is not quite as widespread, not quite as strong, and 23% express outright disapproval. The issue here tends to revolve around upper income residents sensing the potential for police misuse of the drones. 5) Non-Registrants are Slightly Happier with the Program -- The differences here are not large, but they are significant. The analysis shows very high levels of approval among those not registered to vote versus a less robust response among registered voters. The results show 20% of the voters actually disapprove of the drone program, while the percentage is only 9% among non- registrants. Although the lower approval among voters is relatively moderate, decisionmakers should be aware of the drop-off in support for the program because they tend to pay closer attention to civic matters. 6) Ability for Chula Vista to Maintain Data Privacy is Important -- Residents who are more confident that Chula Vista keeps their data private are more approving of the drone program. No ne in our sample who expressed extreme confidence in Chula Vista's data privacy procedures disapprove of the police using drones for law enforcement. There is also very little disapproval among those who are very confident when it comes to Chula Vista protecting citizen data. However, among those only somewhat confident about that, one-in-six have a problem with the drone program, and that reaches one-quarter among those who are less than somewhat confident. So, while not having confidence in Chula Vista's data privacy procedures is not a dealbreaker for residents, it is certainly not helpful in allaying fears about the drone program. And if there were to be a Chula Vista-specific data breach, declines in the approval of the drone program should be expected . 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 453 of 810 Page 18 7) Almost Universal Approval in South Central Communities -- No community can be said to disapprove of the drone program, but the South Central area of Chula Vista stands out as significantly less questioning. A mere 7% there disapprove of the program, and just 2% strongly disapprove. The other areas we examined exhibit widespread approval -- more than 70% -- but all of them showed substantial amounts of disapproval as well. Therefore, South Central stands out as Chula Vista's most drone-accepting area. Drone Use Benefits The aspect that drones provide live video to police so they know what to expect when they arrive, and the de - escalation aspect are both perceived as highly beneficial by large majorities of residents. Only about 6% see each of these aspects of the drone program as not beneficial. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 454 of 810 Page 19 The de-escalation message strongly appeals to residents who trust the police a lot. They are, however, not the “target market” for such a message. Among those who trust the police less, women do tend to see de-escalation as a strong benefit of the drones, but men are very lukewarm . The Johnny-on-the-spot feature of the drones is, naturally, highly appealing to those who at least somewhat trust the police. On the other hand, this does not matter much to those who admit to at least some distrust in the police department. Although this shows more promise of actually increasing approval of the program, neither drone benefit resonates strongly with marginally (or less) trusting residents. Drone Use Concerns About one-third of residents are highly concerned about innocent people being filmed by the drones, and 36% are concerned about other law enforcement and immigration agencies getting ahold of drone footage. While those are certainly significant numbers, more residents are not worried about these things than are highly concerned. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 455 of 810 Page 20 The 28% of residents who distrust the police tend to buy into the argument that drones might record video of innocent people. Among the rest of the population, this does not regi ster as much of a concern. The question of shared footage is more polarizing than the invasion of residents’ privacy. The concern that the footage might be shared with other law enforcement agencies really sticks in the craw of those who do not trust the p olice much. For them, this is a very big deal, and even gets the attention of men who somewhat trust the police department. The rest of the residents, women who somewhat trust the police and all others who have a lot of trust, do not share this concern. Both concerns we tested have the tendency to reinforce the anti -drone sentiments of residents who dislike them, but neither are very convincing as a reason for the rest of the population to disapprove. Informed Sentiment Related to the Drone Program After exposure to both benefits and concerns and an explanation of the police department’s drone policy, aggregate approval remains the same. This does not mean that individual opinions did not change. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 456 of 810 Page 21 Movement The back-and-forth related to the drones did not produce significant opinion change. In the informed test, opinions of the drone program continue to be mainly driven by levels of trust in the police department. Although the debate was a net stalemate, more respondents moved in the direction of approval than disapproval. One segment where the drone debate did prompt a positive reassessment is comprised of residents who had heard about privacy or surveillance concerns: they became much less hostile to the drone program in the informed test. In the end, this group was basically split in their opinion when they had initially clearly disapproved before being exposed to the messaging. This is evidence the messages do address the privacy concerns. We also find voters and, separately, those younger than 46 became more supportive of the drone program after the debate. Exposure to Information about the License Plate Reader Program When asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the City of Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader (LPR) program, 78% report not being exposed to any information. It’s clear that it has not achieved the same degree of visibility as the drone program. Exposure to LPR information is higher among White residents, as 37% have seen, read or heard something, but even among them the program has not received a lot of attention. The program is close to invisible for non-white women, with only 13% reporting any exposure to it. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 457 of 810 Page 22 The types of information are similar to what the drones produce. The top answer is that the LPR readers are in use, which comes up in the word cloud. This is a lot of what the White residents are referring to and even more so if they reside in the 91910 ZIP code. Four percent talk about news stories they have read in the papers or on the web or seen on the TV. Taken together, about 12% have been exposed to what we consider “neutral” or generally “non-negative” information about the LPR program. Two percent report reading or hearing that information from the readers is being shared with other agencies, and this has penetrated a bit more in the east Chula Vista neighborhoods where 9% report that. One and a half percent have heard about privacy issues and another 1.5% have heard that some people find the program controversial. These three types of responses could be categorized as “negative” exposure, so 5% of the residents have become aware of some aspect of the program that could influence them to disapprove of the program. The ratio of non-negative to negative information is therefore greater than 2:1. Current Sentiment Related to the Automated License Plate Reader Program Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader (LPR) program currently generates significantly less approval than the drone program. Still, 63% approve of the program, 38% strongly so. On the other hand, 31% expressed disapproval, 18% of whom strongly disapprove. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 458 of 810 Page 23 Why? Main Reason for Approval of the Automated License Plate Reader Program When respondents who approve of the automated license plate reader program are asked why, one-third say they believe it will help deter/reduce/solve crimes. One told us they approve because it “can easily identify cars that have some sort of criminal record attached to it,” while another said, “reducing crime, preventing crime, and solving crimes is the most important thing in a community to keep it safe.” Another resident noted “license plates are issued for the purpose of identifying a vehicle and potentially identifying the registered owner and address; LPR cameras seem to make that process efficient if used within reasonable situations such as criminal investigations.” That the program promotes safety and security is mentioned by 17%. Many in this group see the program as potentially beneficial to them personally, along with the wider community, saying, “for my safety and that of all the people who live in Chula Vista, safety is the main thing” and “it potentially makes my life safer.” Lower-income male approvers mentioned this justification more often. An additional 17% of those who approve think the program can help find missing persons or criminals, a rationale more often cited by White residents. Although catching criminals is the focus of these folk s – “If technology can assist the police with safely removing criminals from the streets then why not” – the program’s other potential uses do not go unnoticed. Several people appreciated its value in situations like “child abductions, hit-and-run, drunk driving, and road rage” and as a resource to “catch people they’ve been trying to find; amber alerts, kidnapping, people that have warrants out.” 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 459 of 810 Page 24 LPR being “helpful to police” was key for only 7% of approvers. Although many of these responses are nebulous – “I think it is very helpful to the police” – some approvers in this category mention specific benefits such as “it takes away attention from the officer to look up the license plate they could use this so they are able to focus on more important things,” “it can help the low number of law enforcement bridge the gap with already overwhelming mounting duties they have to perform,” and “it relieves administrative burdens on police.” Another 6% say LPR will help with traffic incidents, and women home in on th is reasoning more often than men do. One individual approves because “if something happens like an accident they will know how or what happened,” while another likes LPR because “we have a race car problem here in Chula Vista.” The remaining responses are mentioned by fewer than 5% of residents who approve of the program. Main Reason for Disapproval of the Automated License Plate Reader Program When we ask Chula Vistans who don’t like the program for their rationales, two reasons stand out from the others. A substantial 37% worry about police misuse of the cameras and program. Specific concerns ranged from “I believe it’s invasive and puts a lot of innocent people at risk,” to “they can possibly use that information for other reasons other than to investiga te,” and “any time data is collected without consent, I feel it’s a violation of folks rights and I do not have any faith in CVPD’s oversight of this project.” Being as transparent and open as possible about how and when this data is used, while also ensuring the public their sensitive data is kept strictly confidential, is important. If the Department is perceived as misusing the data, negative public opinion of the LPR program would certainly spread. Twenty-six percent of detractors have privacy concerns. At 45%, this fear is far more prevalent among disapprovers age 46 and older than it is among their younger neighbors, who only raise this issue 15% of the time. Those giving this response are worried because “it sounds like a police state; big brother to the max,” and even compared the program to China saying, “if no crime has been committed it seems like overreach to document property just in case; China does this and I’m not OK with it.” Another resident stated it is an “invasion of privacy; local government tracking citizens is not appropriate.” Seven percent are apprehensive about the cameras being wrong, and non -Latinos are more concerned about this. That the cameras “can have errors” and that “people will steal license plates and others will be accu sed of crimes not committed by them” were some of the doubts aired by this fairly small group. Ensuring a system is in place for rectifying reader errors and making sure the public is aware of it are options to consider. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 460 of 810 Page 25 Needing more information about the program was cited as a reason for disapproval by 6% and was more often mentioned by Latinos. These residents simply don’t have enough information on the LPR program, so they may become fans of the program once they learn more about it. Finally, 5% are worried LPR will be used to target specific people. This is another belief more prevalent among Latinos, who could be concerned about racial profiling. As one Latina homeowner who took the survey in English put it, “the Chula Vista Police Department’s reputation is of racial profiling and targeting underrepresented communities.” Again, transparency about how the system works and communicating that LPRs scan plates, not an individual’s appearance, may help alleviate these fears. The remaining disapproval rationales were each mentioned by less than 5% of residents. When we use multiple regression analysis, we find seven key drivers of approval and disapproval for Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader program. 1) Trust in the Department Breeds Approval -- Much of the sentiment related to the license plate reader program revolves tightly around how much trust residents place in the Chula Vista police departments policies. Those who trust the department a lot rarely have serious problems with the program; nearly 60% of them strongly approve, and just 14% register any disapproval. Among those who somewhat trust the police to adopt policies benefitting the public, support is still widespread, as about 60% approve of the license plate reader program, but weaker. These residents disapprove 30% of the time. Still, when the police department engenders some substantial trust, the license plate reader program does not run into serious or widespread problems with the public. Even most who say they do not trust the police “much” approve of the program, but approval is soft. More only somewhat than strongly approve, and now we find 45% disapprove of the program. In fact, slightly more folks who admit to not trusting the police much strongly disapprove of the license plate reader program than strongly approve of it. Finally, a complete lack of trust results in strong disapproval for the program. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 461 of 810 Page 26 As with the drone program, analysis of the LPR program data clearly indicates building support for the program can only occur when distrust of the department is lessened. Fortunately for Chula Vista, and, more precisely, it's license plate reader program, the Police Department is fairly well trusted. Of course, if there were something to erode the public's trust in the department, support would sink. 2) Spanish-Speaking Residents are Over the Moon -- Residents who took the survey in Spanish overwhelmingly approve of the program, as 78% express strong approval and total approval reaches 84%. Because the variable h ere is the survey’s language rather than ethnicity, it is possible something was "lost in translation." However, further analysis shows Spanish language speakers do not seem to be confused by the question. They are generally bigger fans of what they see as the safety and security provided by the license plate readers and are also less inclined to cite privacy concerns with them. 3) Opinions Partly Depend on What Residents Have Seen/Read/Heard -- Without much information out there on the license plate reader program, the findings here are somewhat slim. However, the data shows that if the main thing residents are exposed to is privacy issues swirling around the program or that the LPR information is shared with other agencies, then disapproval rises dramatically. That this only applies to about 4% of the residents is one reason why most approve of the license plate reader program. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 462 of 810 Page 27 4) More Skepticism in North Central -- Residents in the North Central portion of Chula Vista react with a split verdict on the license plate readers. Although 45% approve of the program, 47% disapprove of it in this area. Digging a little deeper, we find these residents are more sensitive to privacy concerns and the potential for police misuse. On the other hand, there is very little hostility towards the program in the South Central region, and other regions are not upset with it. 5) Voters are More Favorable – Registered voters in Chula Vista approve of the license plate reader program 65% of the time, and only disapprove 29% of the time. They are significantly more in favor of the program than nonvoters, among whom only 59% approve and 39% disapprove (26% strongly). Significantly more non- registrants focus on the potential for police misuse. 6) Much Less Opposition from Asian Residents -- A mere 21% of Asian and Pacific Islander residents register disapproval of the license plate reader program, much better than the 32% disapproval among the rest of the population. Further, strong disapproval among Asian residents is about half what it is among non-Asians. It is unclear why this significant difference exists. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 463 of 810 Page 28 7) Middle-Age Females are Big Fans -- Women between the ages of 35 and 54 express overwhelming support for the program. With 45% strongly approving and another 29% somewhat approving, this large group is a bulwark of support. Further, there is very little strong disapproval among middle-age women, as just 6% really do not like the program. Among other things, Women in their late 30s to early 50s more often appreciate the license plate readers' ability to find missing persons. Automated License Plate Reader Program Benefits Locating missing persons using the license plate reader program is seen as highly beneficial by 70% of the residents, and using the data to investigate and solve violent crimes is perceived to be highly beneficial by 62%. In both cases, only about 10% see these things as not benefits delivered by the automated license plate reader program. Locating missing persons turns out to be a huge selling point for the license plate readers. No demographic or attitudinal group does not like this, although those difficult North Central residents are a bit less impressed with it. This minor geographic issue aside, this is the only benefit of the four (including those related to the drone program) for which opinions don’t hinge on impressions of the police. One reason for this message’s usefulness: it is not about the police, it is about the people. It therefore does not sound self-serving for the police and framed as a "service" to the public. Locating missing persons “breaks the mold” that the other three pro-police benefits settle in to. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 464 of 810 Page 29 The investigational aspects of the license plate reader program break down along now predictable trust fault lines. Residents who trust the police a lot, love that the data will be used to solve violent crime and arrest criminal suspects. Those in the "somewhat" trusting category also believe this is a big benefit, but not as much as their highly trusting counterparts. On the other hand, those who do not trust the police much or at all do not see value in this. Automated License Plate Reader Program Concerns The amount of concern and also the lack of concern is surprisingly consistent with what we found for the drone program. About 33% are highly concerned that the police department is recording the data from innocent residents, and 35% are highly concerned that the information is shared with federal immigration agencies. Again, in both cases more residents are unconcerned than highly concerned. Those who distrust the police put a lot of weight into the concern about license plate readings equaling too much surveillance and are not effective enough. Even those who somewhat trust the police flirt with this concern, but those who trust the police lot are completely unimpressed by it. That license plate information will be shared with immigration agencies is another concern breaking along trust fissures. Those who distrust the police, predictably, see this as a real concern, while those who trust the police a lot dismiss it. In between, women who only somewhat trust the police give this some shrift, but males are not buying the concern about sharing data. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 465 of 810 Page 30 Spanish language respondents tend to be less concerned about the information being shared with immigration authorities. Informed Sentiment Related to the Automated License Plate Reader Program After hearing about the benefits and concerns related to the automated license plate reader program, and then hearing that the police department limits access to the data and does not share it with federal agencies, approval edged up and strong disapproval edged down. Movement The discussion of the benefits and concerns led to positive opinion change for the LPR program. It is unsurprising to find significant opinion change in this case because little was known about for the program compared to the drones. Opinion is more likely to change when the public is less informed about an issue. Even though approval jumped in the informed test, opinions of the LPR program remain largely tied to the amount of trust residents have in the police department. Residents who trust the police at least somewhat became much more likely to approve of the LPR program after the discussion. On the other hand, those with "not much" trust in the police department's policies went in the other direction, becoming more disapproving after hearing the back-and-forth. This reinforces the importance of a trustworthy police department, as Chula Vista generally does. Having faith in the police department is not only linked to current impressions, but trust is a necessary to lay the foundation for positive opinion change. While Asian residents maintained their high level of approval for the license plate reader program, it was Hispanics and Whites who became much more favorable after the debate. English speakers gained greater approval of the license plate reader program after the debate. However, they still did not come close to the ultra-high levels of support we found among Spanish speakers. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 466 of 810 Page 31 Forward-looking City Policies Most residents strongly approve of cameras on traffic signal pol es designed to improve traffic flow and safety. Only 18% disapprove of this program, so it is very popular in Chula Vista. Residents who express “a lot” or “some” trust in the Chula Vista Police Department are far more likely to approve of traffic cameras than are those who are less trusting, and approval is even stronger among highly trustful women; 69% of them strongly approve of the cameras compared to 56% of men. Although the cameras are already a popular policy, the more residents trust the police department, the more they will approve of traffic cameras. Seventy percent of residents think it is very or extremely important that the city adopt a new privacy protection policy in an effort to make the city’s use of new technologies transparent and efficient. Only 7% think that is unimportant, so this is certainly a priority in the eyes of the public. Some residents are so skeptical of Chula Vista’s ability to keep data confidential that a new policy will not appease them. As the chart shows, those not at all confident in this regard basically turn up their nose at a new privacy policy coming from the city, as if to say, “it just doesn’t matter.” A new policy is, however, important to varying degrees for the balance of the residents. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 467 of 810 Page 32 Chula Vista Privacy Poll n=607 Chula Vista residents Margin of Sampling Error +/- 4% March 21 - 30, 2022 Weighted on Spanish language, age, ethnicity, gender Hello is ____ there? Hi this is _____ with Competitive Edge Research, a national polling firm and we’re calling the good folks of Chula Vista to ask your opinion on local issues. We are not selling anything. Most people find it interesting; this is your chance to make your voice heard, and all your answers will be kept strictly confidential. Please let me begin by asking... Q1. To help us better understand different areas of Chula Vista, what is your ZIP code? % 91902 2.5 91910 32.2 91911 35.4 91913 15.6 91914 5.7 91915 8.6 Q2. And in what year were you born? % 18-24 12.0 25-34 19.0 35-44 19.0 45-54 19.0 55-64 15.0 65+ 16.0 Q3. Do you think things in Chula Vista are moving in the right direction or have they gotten off on the wrong track? % Right direction, strongly 15.7 Right direction, somewhat 36.9 Wrong track, somewhat 16.0 Wrong track, strongly 10.9 Mixed (Not read) 3.7 Unsure (Not read) 16.3 Refused (Not read) 0.6 We’ll be asking some questions about public safety, privacy, and technology. In order to provide services, government agencies, non-profit organizations, and businesses collect personal data like names, birth dates, and home addresses. How confident are you, if at all, that the following keep your personal information safe and private... (Q4-Q5 were rotated) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 468 of 810 Page 33 Ext Conf % Very Conf % Some Conf % Not That Conf % Not at All Conf % Uns % REF % Q4a. The federal government (n=270) 4.9 11.7 36.3 24.4 21.0 1.7 0.0 Q4b. Online businesses like Facebook and Amazon (n=337) 5.4 5.2 24.0 19.2 39.8 5.2 1.1 Q5. The City of Chula Vista 6.1 14.6 35.2 22.0 13.8 7.8 0.4 Q6. How much, if at all, do you trust the Chula Vista police department to implement policies that are in the best interests of the public? Do you trust it a lot, somewhat, not much, or not at all? % A lot 28.7 Somewhat 43.1 Not much 20.6 Not at all 4.8 Unsure (Not read) 2.7 Refused (Not read) 0.1 Q7a. Cameras are attached to some of the traffic signal poles at intersections in Chula Vista. Live video from these cameras is sent to the City’s traffic management center, where engineers use it to manage traffic signal timing in an effort to improve traffic flow and safety. Do you approve or disapprove of the City’s use of traffic signal cameras? (n=289) % Approve, strongly 52.5 Approve, somewhat 24.8 Disapprove, somewhat 8.0 Disapprove, strongly 11.2 Unsure (Not read) 3.5 Q7b. The City of Chula Vista is considering adopting a new privacy protection policy in an effort to make the City’s use of new technologies transparent and efficient. How important is it to you, if at all, that the City adopt such a policy? (n=320) % Extremely important 29.1 Very important 40.7 Somewhat important 15.4 Not very important 3.7 Not at all important 3.6 Unsure (Not read) 7.4 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 469 of 810 Page 34 On a different topic . . . (Drone and license plate reader sections were rotated) Q8. What have you seen, read, or heard, if anything, about the city of Chula Vista’s use of drones for law enforcement purposes? % Heard police use drones 12.7 Personal experience/Seen the drones flying 9.1 Privacy/Surveillance concerns 6.3 Read/Seen news stories 4.7 I agree with the program 2.6 Helps find missing persons/criminals 2.6 Crime scene monitoring/surveillance 1.8 The first city to use them 1.6 Police/public safety 1.0 Other 3.2 Nothing/Don't know 54.5 Q9. Do you approve or disapprove of the Chula Vista Police Department’s use of drones, which involves the police launching a drone that provides live video from above an incident? % Approve, strongly 42.0 Approve, somewhat 35.2 Disapprove, somewhat 8.8 Disapprove, strongly 8.6 Mixed (Not read) 0.4 Unsure (Not read) 4.9 Q10. What is the main reason you approve/disapprove of the program? Reasons for Approval (n=477) % Police/Public safety 20.2 Crime scene monitoring/surveillance 19.5 Aid police investigation 18.1 Find missing persons/criminals 6.7 Helicopter replacement 5.5 Improve response times 5.4 Useful tool/technology 4.7 Deter/Reduce crime 1.8 Only if used properly for incidents/emergencies 1.8 Additional police manpower 1.5 Used for traffic incidences 1.5 Crime is increasing 1.0 I trust the police/I have nothing to hide 0.8 Other 4.7 Nothing/Don't know 6.8 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 470 of 810 Page 35 Reasons for Disapproval (n=92) % Privacy concerns 48.9 Police/Government misuse 33.7 Waste of resources 3.3 Other 12.0 Nothing/Don't know 2.2 Tell me how beneficial, if at all, you think the following aspects of the drone program are. (Q11-Q12 were rotated) Q11. The drone can arrive on the incident scene and provide live video to police minutes before a patrol car arrives so that responding officers know what to expect when they arrive. Is this extremely beneficial, very beneficial, somewhat beneficial, not that beneficial, or not at all beneficial to the community? % Extremely beneficial 41.1 Very beneficial 27.9 Somewhat beneficial 23.2 Not that beneficial 3.1 Not at all beneficial 2.9 Unsure (Not read) 1.9 Q12. Drone video has helped Chula Vista police safely de-escalate and resolve potentially dangerous situations without injury to police, suspects or bystanders. Is this extremely beneficial, very beneficial, somewhat beneficial, not that beneficial, or not at all beneficial to the community? % Extremely beneficial 35.9 Very beneficial 32.9 Somewhat beneficial 21.1 Not that beneficial 2.6 Not at all beneficial 3.5 Unsure (Not read) 4.0 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 471 of 810 Page 36 Here are concerns some residents have expressed regarding Chula Vista’s use of drones… (Q13-Q14 were rotated) Q13. Some people worry the drones might record video of innocent people who are not involved in a crime or invade people’s privacy by filming residents in their backyard or home. Are you also extremely concerned, very concerned, somewhat concerned, not that concerned or not at all concerned about this? % Extremely concerned 18.8 Very concerned 13.5 Somewhat concerned 28.6 Not that concerned 18.4 Not at all concerned 19.8 Unsure (Not read) 1.0 Q14. Some people worry that footage from drone cameras will be shared with other law enforcement and immigration agencies that have nothing to do with the original incident. Are you also extremely concerned, very concerned, somewhat concerned, not that concerned or not at all concerned about this? % Extremely concerned 22.4 Very concerned 14.0 Somewhat concerned 21.5 Not that concerned 16.4 Not at all concerned 24.3 Unsure (Not read) 1.4 Q15. The Police Department does not allow drones to be used for general patrol or for discovering new crimes. The drones can only be used to actively respond to emergencies or to serve search warrants signed by a judge. Now that you’ve heard more about the Chula Vista Police Department’s use of drones, which involves the police launching a drone that provides live video from above an incident, do you approve or disapprove of the program? % Approve, strongly 45.5 Approve, somewhat 33.3 Disapprove, somewhat 9.0 Disapprove, strongly 8.3 Mixed (Not read) 0.1 Unsure (Not read) 3.9 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 472 of 810 Page 37 Q16. What have you seen, read, or heard, if anything, about the city of Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader program? % They're being used 7.8 Read/Seen news stories 4.0 Information shared w/other agencies 2.4 Privacy concerns/Government overreach 1.5 People find it controversial 1.5 Scans license plates 0.6 Other 3.5 Nothing/Don't know 78.7 Q17. Do you approve or disapprove of the city of Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader program in which computerized cameras on four of Chula Vista’s 100 patrol cars automatically photograph nearby license plates so police can later use that information to investigate crimes? % Approve, strongly 38.3 Approve, somewhat 24.8 Disapprove, somewhat 13.0 Disapprove, strongly 17.8 Mixed (Not read) 2.0 Unsure (Not read) 4.0 Q18. What is the main reason you approve/disapprove of the program? Reasons for Approval (n=399) % Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes 31.5 Promotes safety/security 16.9 Find missing persons/criminals 16.5 Helpful to police 7.2 Help with traffic incidences 6.2 Data collection 3.3 Nothing to hide 2.1 Find stolen cars 2.1 No public right to privacy 1.2 Improve response times 0.7 Other 8.8 Nothing/Don't know 3.6 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 473 of 810 Page 38 Reasons for Disapproval (n=171) % Police misuse 37.1 Privacy concerns 25.5 The cameras can be wrong 7.1 Need more information 5.6 It will be used to target people 5.1 Too dependent on technology 3.2 Indiscriminate scanning 3.2 No transparency/oversight 2.5 Other 9.8 Nothing/Don't know 1.0 Tell me how beneficial, if at all, you think the following aspects of the Automated License Plate Reader program are. (Q19-Q20 were rotated) Q19. Chula Vista police have been able to locate missing persons using the program. Is this extremely beneficial, very beneficial, somewhat beneficial, not that beneficial, or not at all beneficial to the community? % Extremely beneficial 46.2 Very beneficial 23.7 Somewhat beneficial 18.7 Not that beneficial 4.2 Not at all beneficial 4.4 Unsure (Not read) 2.9 Q20. Chula Vista police have used license plate data to investigate and solve violent crimes and find and arrest criminal suspects. Is this extremely beneficial, very beneficial, somewhat beneficial, not that beneficial, or not at all beneficial to the community? % Extremely beneficial 36.1 Very beneficial 26.0 Somewhat beneficial 24.3 Not that beneficial 5.1 Not at all beneficial 5.1 Unsure (Not read) 3.5 Here are concerns some residents have expressed regarding Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader program… (Q21-Q22 were rotated) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 474 of 810 Page 39 Q21. Only about one out of every 2,000 license plate readings provide a real -time match to a suspicious vehicle. Some people say the Police Department is recording the data of too many innocent residents, creating a system of mass surveillance. Are you extremely concerned, very concerned, somewhat concerned, not that concerned or not at all concerned about this? % Extremely concerned 17.5 Very concerned 15.4 Somewhat concerned 27.2 Not that concerned 17.0 Not at all concerned 20.2 Unsure (Not read) 2.7 Q22. Some people worry the license plate information will be shared with federal immigration agencies that should not be involved. Are you extremely concerned, very concerned, somewhat concerned, not that concerned or not at all concerned about this? % Extremely concerned 21.4 Very concerned 13.6 Somewhat concerned 17.9 Not that concerned 18.2 Not at all concerned 27.2 Unsure (Not read) 1.8 Q23. Police Department policy limits access to the license plate data only to authorized police personnel who are investigating crimes. License plate data cannot be shared with any federal agencies. Now that you’ve heard more about the Automated License Plate Reader program in which computerized cameras on police cars automatically photograph every nearby license plate so police can later use that information to investigate crimes, do you approve or disapprove of that program? % Approve, strongly 38.9 Approve, somewhat 27.2 Disapprove, somewhat 14.7 Disapprove, strongly 13.6 Mixed (Not read) 0.2 Unsure (Not read) 5.3 Refused (Not read) 0.2 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 475 of 810 Page 40 And I have just two demographic questions to ensure we have a representative sample… Q24. Is your ethnic heritage mainly… % Hispanic or Latino 50.6 White or Caucasian 22.3 Asian or Pacific Islander 15.0 Black or African American 2.6 Native American 0.2 Is it ethnically mixed or 7.6 Something else? 0.3 Refused (Not read) 1.4 Q25. Please stop me when I reach the category with your household’s total annual income… % Less than $25,000 6.3 $25 to 40,000 8.8 $40 to 60,000 12.3 $60 to 80,000 12.6 $80 to 100,000 14.0 $100,000 to $150,000 21.9 More than $150,000 16.7 Unsure (Not read) 6.2 Refused (Not read) 1.3 Thanks for your time and your opinion counts, goodbye. 26. GENDER % Male 49.0 Female 51.0 27. LANGUAGE % English 82.5 Spanish 17.0 Tagalog 0.5 28. VOTER REGISTRATION % Voter 77.6 Non-Voter 22.4 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 476 of 810 Page 41 Notes to Crosstabs Crosstabulations of data are simply comparisons of how respond ents to one question answered a separate question or rated in a different category. In statistical terms, crosstabulations attempt to determine whether responses to two different, but possibly related, questions are independent of, or dependent on, one another. The analyst's job is to determine which relationships are significant and then ascertain the underlying causes for those occurrences Cells of data should always be compared first with the corresponding totals in the far-right column and then compared among the other percentages in the original column. For instance, in the first table on page 1 of the crosstabulations, we compare the demographic variables age and gender with the respondents' ethnicity and language. Among other things, the table shows that 8% of the respondents who are 18 to 24 years old are White/Caucasian. This is compared to the row total on the right which shows that 23% of all respondents are White/Caucasian. One can conclude that the younger respondents h ave a lower likelihood of being White/Caucasian than what would normally be expected for all respondents in this study. In other words, there may be some cause for the occurrence of a lower number of 18- to 24-year-olds who are White/Caucasian. One should be careful to avoid making the mistake of inferring that the 8% pertains to how many of the respondents who are White/Caucasian are between 18 to 24 years old. The tables only show how the variable in the banner (top), or independent variable, relates to the variable in the stub (side), or dependent variable. In addition to sampling error (see Limitations) relating to the size of the sample, sampling error also relates to the percentage breakdowns in each variable. Variables which have a 50% "yes," 50% "no" breakdown contain the maximum amount of sampling error. The table below shows the maximum sampling error at the different percentages of response for some segment sizes. Response Sub-Sample Sub-Sample Sub-Sample Percentages = 50 = 150 = 350 10 or 90% 8% 5% 3% 20 or 80% 11% 6% 4% 30 or 70% 13% 7% 4% 40 or 60% 14% 8% 5% 50% 14% 8% 5% 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 477 of 810 Pure Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total ETHNICITY White/Caucasian Hispanic/Latino Black/African American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic Something else n= LANGUAGE English Spanish n= 21%24%8%16%21%25%22%42%23% 49%53%74%53%39%54%58%38%51% 3%2%0%4%3%1%5%2%3% 18%13%0%19%25%17%10%14%15% 9%7%18%8%10%4%4%5%8% 0%1%0%0%2%0%1%0%1% 275 317 11 45 91 133 138 174 592 86%80%100%100%89%74%63%72%83% 14%20%0%0%11%26%37%28%17% 280 324 11 46 92 135 143 177 604 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 12022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 478 of 810 Pure Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total INCOME < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 n= VOTER REGISTRATION Non-Voter Voter n= 6%8%8%2%1%5%10%17%7% 13%6%10%7%7%7%13%15%10% 13%13%16%6%7%18%22%13%13% 14%13%38%15%6%5%11%13%14% 13%17%0%17%24%18%13%14%15% 26%21%18%40%23%27%13%16%24% 15%21%10%13%32%21%17%12%18% 255 296 11 41 83 123 134 159 551 30%15%30%24%18%23%25%17%22% 70%85%70%76%82%77%75%83%78% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 22022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 479 of 810 Pure Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total AREA Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central n= ZIP CODE 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 n= 35%22%46%29%28%24%21%29%29% 11%21%16%12%15%14%13%24%16% 13%14%8%17%12%18%10%11%13% 29%28%20%31%22%28%41%26%28% 14%15%10%10%23%17%14%10%14% 275 306 11 42 89 131 137 171 581 1%4%8%2%0%1%4%2%3% 33%31%44%29%32%28%23%40%32% 39%32%30%40%32%34%45%31%35% 12%20%10%11%21%18%16%15%16% 6%6%8%7%5%6%5%4%6% 9%8%0%12%10%12%7%8%9% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 32022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 480 of 810 Pure Demographics GENDER TOTAL Female Male Total AGE 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ n= 14%10%12% 19%19%19% 17%21%19% 19%19%19% 17%13%15% 14%18%16% 281 326 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 42022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 481 of 810 Pure Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total GENDER Female Male n= AGE 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ n= 48%49%58%60%58%53%42%51% 52%51%42%40%42%47%58%49% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 4%18%0%0%28%15%0%12% 13%19%29%24%20%23%0%19% 18%15%25%31%25%20%13%19% 21%20%8%21%9%17%29%19% 15%17%28%9%8%11%33%15% 29%12%10%14%10%14%25%16% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 52022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 482 of 810 Pure Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total INCOME < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 n= VOTER REGISTRATION Non-Voter Voter n= 3%11%3%1%0%4%22%7% 5%13%7%7%6%8%17%10% 10%17%0%4%22%10%29%13% 15%15%3%6%13%15%3%14% 17%12%33%22%11%16%13%15% 23%17%35%41%34%28%3%24% 26%15%19%20%14%19%13%18% 217 208 20 53 41 520 28 551 16%28%18%21%12%20%34%22% 84%72%82%79%88%80%66%78% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 62022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 483 of 810 Pure Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total AREA Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central n= ZIP CODE 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 n= 43%30%13%10%15%31%20%29% 18%13%24%15%24%16%12%16% 15%9%23%22%13%14%9%13% 13%41%15%16%24%24%49%28% 10%7%25%37%24%15%9%14% 232 211 23 54 42 549 29 581 5%2%0%0%1%3%0%3% 49%30%27%17%28%33%28%32% 18%46%19%30%34%33%46%35% 13%11%26%27%24%15%17%16% 7%4%10%13%1%7%0%6% 8%6%18%13%12%9%9%9% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 72022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 484 of 810 Pure Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total GENDER Female Male n= AGE 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ n= 44%70%51%53%45%56%43%68%46%51% 56%30%49%47%55%44%57%32%54%49% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 15%14%16%36%0%10%7%16%11%12% 5%13%9%21%21%31%13%20%19%19% 2%14%10%8%30%18%33%15%20%19% 14%13%25%7%22%21%22%19%19%19% 24%21%25%12%13%9%15%17%14%15% 38%25%15%15%14%11%10%12%17%16% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 82022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 485 of 810 Pure Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total ETHNICITY White/Caucasian Hispanic/Latino Black/African American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic Something else n= LANGUAGE English Spanish n= 11%13%16%25%24%22%32%17%24%23% 85%70%66%60%42%37%42%63%48%51% 1%2%0%0%5%3%2%2%3%3% 2%11%5%7%24%27%17%14%16%15% 0%5%13%8%6%11%6%4%9%8% 1%0%0%0%0%0%1%0%1%1% 28 48 64 68 89 131 114 100 492 592 44%69%62%96%85%98%88%74%85%83% 56%31%38%4%15%2%12%26%15%17% 28 47 65 69 91 132 116 101 503 604 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 92022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 486 of 810 Pure Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total AREA Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central n= ZIP CODE 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 n= 45%40%29%45%21%17%27%37%27%29% 11%10%15%11%16%19%21%11%17%16% 7%3%10%1%15%22%21%10%14%13% 37%47%37%39%27%22%5%34%26%28% 1%0%9%4%22%20%26%8%16%14% 28 47 65 64 86 125 113 88 493 581 0%0%1%0%3%5%4%3%2%3% 46%41%41%41%24%22%30%33%32%32% 38%52%44%49%38%28%14%47%32%35% 9%3%4%9%19%21%30%7%18%16% 0%1%8%0%2%13%7%5%6%6% 7%2%1%1%13%10%15%6%9%9% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 102022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 487 of 810 Pure Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total GENDER Female Male n= AGE 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ n= 63%36%49%53%50%27%53%56%38%50%53%51% 37%64%51%47%50%73%47%44%62%50%47%49% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 20%13%8%9%9%39%16%10%8%17%0%12% 19%15%24%20%13%13%17%22%14%23%25%19% 18%17%17%15%30%0%19%17%25%18%21%19% 16%17%26%19%23%11%17%18%22%20%27%19% 11%13%12%22%15%24%11%19%15%12%11%15% 16%25%14%15%11%13%20%14%16%10%15%16% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 112022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 488 of 810 Pure Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total ETHNICITY White/Caucasian Hispanic/Latino Black/African American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic Something else n= LANGUAGE English Spanish n= 35%27%26%11%16%48%35%11%19%26%21%23% 54%42%35%72%25%49%49%67%37%31%38%51% 1%4%5%1%5%0%2%1%4%4%6%3% 6%15%26%9%41%0%8%13%27%35%24%15% 4%11%7%6%13%2%7%7%12%2%11%8% 0%0%1%1%1%0%0%1%1%2%0%1% 172 99 82 142 72 18 209 188 87 35 55 592 88%86%88%71%90%100%85%78%81%100%83%83% 12%14%12%29%10%0%15%22%19%0%17%17% 178 100 84 142 74 19 214 190 89 35 57 604 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 122022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 489 of 810 Pure Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total INCOME < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 n= VOTER REGISTRATION Non-Voter Voter n= 11%5%4%9%0%0%10%7%4%0%6%7% 14%6%2%17%0%0%12%14%2%2%2%10% 14%13%10%18%9%3%17%17%3%19%2%13% 20%9%1%18%4%0%17%19%8%0%2%14% 11%15%17%15%23%19%11%16%18%6%25%15% 14%28%39%19%32%49%16%19%31%52%28%24% 16%23%27%3%31%29%17%7%34%21%34%18% 160 94 76 130 68 18 196 172 82 32 51 551 28%15%16%26%12%28%23%30%11%18%15%22% 72%85%84%74%88%72%77%70%89%82%85%78% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 132022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 490 of 810 Confidence Personal Information is Kept Safe – Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= 17%25%0%32%26%18%16%27%21% 24%25%35%24%17%24%35%18%24% 1%3%0%0%0%0%9%3%2% 43%30%43%44%43%31%27%31%36% 9%14%0%0%14%26%10%14%12% 6%3%22%0%0%2%3%8%5% 123 158 5 20 35 66 68 87 281 34%47%48%60%33%42%33%24%40% 19%20%0%6%35%24%21%25%19% 5%5%0%4%4%0%11%13%5% 26%23%33%24%23%24%18%27%24% 9%1%0%4%5%3%16%3%5% 6%5%18%3%0%8%1%8%5% 157 165 6 26 57 69 74 90 322 13%15%10%10%14%14%20%16%14% 23%21%18%23%24%18%26%22%22% 5%11%16%8%9%2%11%5%8% 35%36%18%42%40%47%26%31%35% 17%13%18%11%10%15%15%21%15% 8%4%20%6%4%5%2%4%6% 281 324 11 45 92 135 142 180 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 142022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 491 of 810 Confidence Personal Information is Kept Safe – Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= 22%15%17%25%36%24%6%21% 23%26%18%24%24%26%14%24% 1%2%15%0%0%1%7%2% 39%36%42%39%32%35%40%36% 11%13%0%11%8%9%27%12% 3%8%8%0%0%5%6%5% 119 92 11 29 21 268 12 281 47%33%61%49%47%45%22%40% 23%21%7%14%14%17%31%19% 5%7%0%4%1%4%10%5% 23%25%28%29%11%26%14%24% 3%7%4%5%1%4%11%5% 0%7%0%0%24%4%12%5% 120 129 12 26 24 303 17 322 15%12%19%17%13%14%14%14% 23%22%31%25%9%21%29%22% 5%8%6%8%14%8%6%8% 39%34%39%36%38%38%22%35% 10%19%5%14%9%13%25%15% 8%6%0%0%18%7%4%6% 240 222 23 55 45 572 30 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 152022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 492 of 810 Confidence Personal Information is Kept Safe – Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= 2%50%21%32%27%15%14%20%21%21% 32%26%24%10%25%33%16%16%27%24% 2%0%0%6%0%0%1%1%2%2% 5%20%43%50%31%38%41%37%36%36% 45%4%11%3%17%11%11%12%12%12% 14%0%1%0%0%2%18%13%3%5% 13 15 31 38 46 61 55 49 232 281 4%46%42%30%43%49%41%44%39%40% 30%24%20%12%32%9%24%13%21%19% 14%4%16%4%4%3%0%5%5%5% 50%5%22%51%15%20%28%25%24%24% 2%18%0%0%1%6%7%8%5%5% 0%2%0%2%5%13%0%5%6%5% 15 32 33 33 45 71 61 52 270 322 15%33%17%6%13%9%16%22%12%14% 14%18%15%28%37%16%21%19%23%22% 2%3%17%5%9%13%2%3%9%8% 17%30%45%38%27%41%39%31%37%35% 52%13%5%19%11%14%12%16%14%15% 0%4%1%4%3%7%10%10%5%6% 28 48 64 71 91 132 116 102 503 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 162022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 493 of 810 Confidence Personal Information is Kept Safe – Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident n= 19%12%24%21%28%8%19%24%17%27%25%21% 18%32%28%24%33%69%17%24%24%48%20%24% 1%0%0%4%2%0%1%3%2%0%0%2% 35%41%19%45%24%23%45%38%34%9%23%36% 14%14%25%6%11%0%13%5%21%12%28%12% 14%1%5%0%2%0%5%7%2%4%3%5% 90 36 36 65 37 10 101 88 40 12 30 281 34%43%50%44%33%44%37%42%34%57%45%40% 14%19%25%18%25%29%16%19%22%12%32%19% 2%15%2%7%0%13%5%5%7%4%1%5% 41%20%21%13%19%6%35%19%17%23%22%24% 5%2%1%9%7%7%4%7%7%3%0%5% 3%0%0%10%15%0%2%8%13%0%0%5% 86 66 48 77 36 9 112 101 50 23 27 322 12%11%11%19%13%5%12%17%12%22%9%14% 28%17%20%16%28%15%32%16%18%6%27%22% 3%11%11%11%6%43%4%8%7%21%1%8% 30%47%37%33%34%37%34%36%37%21%47%35% 18%13%17%15%8%0%15%14%16%25%12%15% 9%1%5%5%12%0%4%8%11%5%4%6% 177 102 84 142 74 19 215 189 90 35 57 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 172022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 494 of 810 Trust in Chula Vista Police - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot n= 4%6%8%8%3%3%4%3%5% 21%21%28%35%18%22%14%10%21% 45%44%34%46%46%40%52%46%44% 31%28%30%11%32%35%30%41%30% 267 321 11 45 87 133 140 172 588 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Trust in Chula Vista Police - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot n= 4%5%3%6%2%6%0%5% 14%21%26%27%29%21%24%21% 41%50%46%38%28%42%53%44% 41%24%25%29%41%31%23%30% 233 218 23 54 42 556 29 588 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 182022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 495 of 810 Trust in Chula Vista Police - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot n= 1%3%8%1%6%8%2%0%6%5% 3%33%23%22%17%20%27%22%21%21% 54%30%52%36%51%43%45%57%41%44% 42%34%17%41%26%29%27%20%32%30% 28 46 62 71 87 130 113 96 492 588 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Trust in Chula Vista Police - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot n= 5%12%1%4%5%40%5%5%3%1%1%5% 17%27%19%19%25%24%23%17%27%19%22%21% 49%36%54%46%33%22%42%49%33%52%52%44% 29%25%26%31%37%15%30%28%38%28%24%30% 172 99 82 140 71 18 206 188 86 34 56 588 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 192022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 496 of 810 Trust in CV Police - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot n= 4%13%0%4%0%3%6%4%20%1%0%0%5% 33%18%0%21%16%0%35%10%4%20%14%0%21% 43%50%90%44%22%61%45%55%60%42%8%28%44% 21%19%10%31%63%36%14%31%17%37%78%72%30% 68 69 4 82 36 10 126 66 20 78 16 9 588 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Trust in CV Police - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot n= 9%4%21%4%0%0%5% 35%25%16%17%21%7%21% 36%51%51%50%30%35%44% 21%20%12%29%49%58%30% 94 122 36 228 79 27 588 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 202022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 497 of 810 Civic Mood - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 10%12%0%12%13%11%17%10%11% 11%21%10%9%21%23%14%17%16% 23%17%26%20%19%19%18%20%20% 37%37%44%45%38%25%36%36%37% 19%13%20%14%10%22%14%17%16% 278 323 11 46 91 134 143 176 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Civic Mood - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 14%9%11%11%11%12%6%11% 18%15%19%21%6%16%15%16% 14%22%20%18%29%19%27%20% 40%36%38%43%23%39%29%37% 13%18%12%7%31%14%24%16% 239 220 23 54 46 568 30 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 212022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 498 of 810 Civic Mood - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 6%17%13%2%14%7%15%9%11%11% 8%20%9%9%30%12%20%14%17%16% 12%36%35%19%16%17%5%18%21%20% 49%15%26%46%33%47%48%40%36%37% 26%12%17%25%7%16%11%19%15%16% 28 47 65 70 90 130 116 102 499 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Civic Mood - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 11%13%11%12%7%2%10%13%6%14%13%11% 14%21%23%7%29%12%16%8%30%17%24%16% 16%26%7%34%9%46%21%27%9%10%9%20% 40%29%51%28%37%34%37%33%39%49%46%37% 18%11%8%19%18%6%16%19%16%11%7%16% 176 102 84 140 73 19 213 188 89 35 57 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 222022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 499 of 810 Civic Mood - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 36%13%0%6%4%3%14%5%5%4%21%0%11% 18%17%8%6%26%3%19%36%11%12%4%0%16% 18%28%33%23%10%0%17%20%40%20%33%0%20% 23%40%0%37%33%60%42%33%20%48%29%31%37% 5%2%59%28%26%34%9%6%24%16%14%69%16% 73 69 6 83 36 10 126 72 19 79 16 8 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Civic Mood - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 38%7%7%8%5%0%11% 29%26%8%13%10%0%16% 14%17%47%22%17%10%20% 14%49%24%39%47%29%37% 5%2%13%18%22%61%16% 95 125 39 235 79 26 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 232022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 500 of 810 Civic Mood - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total CIVIC MOOD Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsure Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly n= 34%9%10%10%11% 2%26%15%13%16% 40%28%17%12%20% 19%34%46%31%37% 5%3%11%34%16% 26 86 259 211 601 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Traffic Camera Approval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 4%18%19%9%12%16%8%2%11% 10%6%24%6%6%5%2%11%8% 25%25%38%32%30%18%20%20%25% 58%47%19%48%47%60%67%60%53% 3%4%0%6%5%2%3%6%3% 142 162 5 18 41 79 67 94 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 242022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 501 of 810 Traffic Camera Approval - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 10%9%0%11%37%12%8%11% 6%11%0%0%5%9%5%8% 30%25%29%14%27%30%0%25% 50%53%71%69%29%46%82%53% 5%2%0%6%4%3%5%3% 120 116 14 23 20 289 14 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Traffic Camera Approval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 2%0%16%8%20%7%15%12%11%11% 2%30%13%5%0%5%6%15%6%8% 27%20%22%32%36%25%22%15%27%25% 70%50%48%55%42%60%56%53%52%53% 0%0%1%0%1%3%1%5%3%3% 15 22 34 36 50 59 56 54 250 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 252022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 502 of 810 Traffic Camera Approval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 4%26%11%13%6%36%9%10%20%0%18%11% 11%6%5%9%4%0%12%7%0%4%5%8% 31%16%30%17%32%34%24%25%20%44%17%25% 51%47%50%58%58%25%50%55%60%48%57%53% 3%4%5%4%0%5%5%3%0%5%3%3% 94 59 43 66 30 12 118 93 36 16 29 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Traffic Camera Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 20%6%0%2%28%0%22%6%0%6%0%0%11% 11%8%0%3%0%0%18%4%29%0%0%5%8% 32%49%0%16%5%0%11%29%3%41%22%29%25% 33%30%45%73%67%100%48%59%64%48%78%66%53% 3%7%55%6%0%0%1%1%4%5%0%0%3% 45 35 2 36 16 2 64 43 11 38 5 5 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 262022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 503 of 810 Traffic Camera Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 14%6%3%15%12%6%11% 29%9%2%3%2%2%8% 12%21%52%31%21%18%25% 41%59%39%51%61%55%53% 4%5%4%0%4%18%3% 52 71 19 108 40 13 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Traffic Camera Approval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 16%31%4%6%11% 25%17%6%2%8% 20%23%33%15%25% 39%24%56%73%53% 0%5%1%3%3% 15 44 129 103 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 272022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 504 of 810 Traffic Camera Approval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure n= 17%16%21%5%2%11% 13%19%7%2%5%8% 19%25%14%41%10%25% 50%35%52%52%77%53% 2%5%6%1%6%3% 50 62 49 99 41 304 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Privacy Protection Policy - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 1%7%0%3%11%3%0%1%4% 2%6%0%9%2%0%8%1%4% 15%15%0%24%11%28%16%13%15% 43%38%52%26%55%35%34%43%41% 28%30%31%32%15%31%33%38%29% 11%4%17%6%6%3%10%5%7% 139 164 6 28 51 56 76 86 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 282022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 505 of 810 Privacy Protection Policy - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 5%4%0%0%3%2%12%4% 3%6%13%0%0%3%6%4% 25%9%19%22%18%19%0%15% 24%45%48%56%19%40%43%41% 34%29%0%17%55%29%33%29% 9%7%19%4%4%8%6%7% 120 107 9 32 26 285 16 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 292022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 506 of 810 Privacy Protection Policy - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 0%0%0%0%3%2%12%0%5%4% 0%13%0%0%1%4%2%7%3%4% 20%21%15%13%18%15%12%11%17%15% 43%45%50%68%36%28%41%46%39%41% 33%19%23%14%36%48%17%23%31%29% 3%1%13%5%7%3%15%12%6%7% 13 26 31 35 41 73 60 48 255 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Privacy Protection Policy - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 6%2%1%0%0%0%14%0%0%0%2%4% 0%2%3%7%3%0%0%8%0%11%1%4% 16%6%34%14%8%0%15%14%8%16%38%15% 38%50%43%43%43%5%43%40%43%49%37%41% 22%38%19%28%40%95%21%27%41%24%22%29% 17%2%0%8%6%0%6%12%7%0%0%7% 84 43 41 77 44 7 97 98 54 19 28 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 302022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 507 of 810 Privacy Protection Policy - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 0%3%0%12%0%0%5%0%0%1%0%0%4% 1%7%0%4%5%0%9%1%0%0%0%0%4% 37%9%9%14%32%9%16%11%10%12%10%0%15% 23%17%9%52%37%0%33%78%68%59%43%8%41% 26%52%71%14%23%30%32%7%21%26%47%92%29% 12%12%11%5%2%61%6%3%0%1%0%0%7% 28 34 4 51 20 8 62 29 9 41 11 4 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Privacy Protection Policy - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 8%10%0%1%0%0%4% 11%3%0%3%0%9%4% 28%4%13%22%10%8%15% 27%54%19%43%51%12%41% 10%20%58%30%37%38%29% 15%8%10%1%2%33%7% 44 55 20 129 39 15 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 312022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 508 of 810 Privacy Protection Policy - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 20%10%1%1%4% 0%5%5%3%4% 12%23%13%15%15% 12%34%41%48%41% 53%25%29%30%29% 3%4%11%3%7% 12 42 132 111 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Privacy Protection Policy - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure n= 11%0%1%6%0%4% 1%3%13%2%0%4% 40%14%6%16%10%15% 11%64%30%39%53%41% 27%13%40%28%37%29% 10%7%10%9%0%7% 38 53 46 117 46 303 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 322022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 509 of 810 Exposure to Drone Program - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 12%14%0%8%17%15%12%20%13% 8%10%8%9%10%10%8%8%9% 4%9%16%4%4%8%6%4%6% 4%5%0%9%8%0%4%5%5% 9%16%10%13%15%9%10%19%13% 63%45%66%57%46%58%60%44%55% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to Drone Program - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 12%13%11%13%10%11%18%13% 20%5%2%1%13%11%0%9% 7%6%13%5%3%7%3%6% 5%2%0%17%4%6%0%5% 12%13%11%13%12%13%10%13% 43%61%63%51%58%51%70%55% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 332022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 510 of 810 Exposure to Drone Program - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 7%14%4%8%16%12%22%7%14%13% 9%3%8%19%7%9%9%3%11%9% 2%2%8%5%8%11%4%3%7%6% 1%0%2%4%5%7%9%6%4%5% 16%21%12%7%17%10%13%15%12%13% 65%60%66%56%47%52%43%66%51%55% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to Drone Program - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 5%20%14%11%12%13%12%11%15%14%18%13% 19%3%3%8%4%9%17%7%4%4%2%9% 3%12%15%4%5%42%4%3%5%26%5%6% 2%5%11%1%11%0%4%1%10%22%2%5% 13%20%8%9%17%6%14%11%21%7%8%13% 57%40%48%68%50%29%50%66%46%27%64%55% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 342022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 511 of 810 Exposure to Drone Program - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 15%15%8%16%24%5%7%15%9%16%2%3%13% 22%3%0%6%14%0%13%8%7%6%4%0%9% 8%22%59%2%0%0%4%4%0%8%3%0%6% 2%2%0%3%1%3%10%8%11%2%3%0%5% 23%8%0%11%15%29%16%9%21%9%5%2%13% 31%49%33%61%45%63%51%55%52%58%84%95%55% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to Drone Program - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 12%16%10%13%12%5%13% 9%13%8%10%6%2%9% 3%4%36%5%0%0%6% 7%4%8%2%8%1%5% 18%12%3%13%16%5%13% 50%50%35%57%58%86%55% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 352022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 512 of 810 Exposure to Drone Program - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 13%17%8%14%13% 13%6%11%8%9% 28%4%7%3%6% 0%6%5%5%5% 10%16%10%15%13% 36%50%60%54%55% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to Drone Program - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 20%16%10%11%13%13% 12%11%6%11%5%9% 6%8%9%6%3%6% 2%10%2%7%1%5% 13%21%4%13%15%13% 48%35%70%53%62%55% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 362022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 513 of 810 Exposure to Drone Program - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 20%0%15%9%29%13% 12%8%7%11%5%9% 10%11%13%1%0%6% 0%0%3%3%0%5% 10%38%6%14%20%13% 49%43%57%62%45%55% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 372022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 514 of 810 Exposure to Drone Program - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES Heard police use drones Personal experience/Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surveillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don't know n= 55%0%16%15%6%18%13% 23%3%13%6%9%12%9% 7%0%2%2%17%2%6% 0%0%6%13%2%0%5% 0%0%10%11%16%15%13% 15%97%52%53%49%54%55% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Drones Approval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 5%12%8%12%16%6%4%2%9% 10%8%0%23%7%4%9%7%9% 41%29%66%27%33%34%30%32%35% 39%45%18%36%37%52%48%57%42% 1%0%0%0%1%1%1%0%0% 4%6%8%2%7%3%9%2%5% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 4%13%8%10%14%11%3%2%8% 9%9%18%6%8%7%10%8%9% 35%31%54%38%30%26%31%26%33% 47%43%20%42%40%52%53%61%45% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 5%3%0%4%8%4%3%2%4% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 3%14%8%11%14%6%4%6%9% 11%16%26%7%11%18%12%12%14% 2%2%0%0%5%0%2%1%2% 23%17%18%29%18%13%23%17%20% 61%52%48%53%52%62%58%65%57% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 382022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 515 of 810 Drones Approval - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 10%8%0%7%4%9%6%9% 8%7%32%13%9%10%6%9% 32%36%46%32%48%38%21%35% 45%43%18%45%33%37%65%42% 0%0%0%0%2%1%0%0% 5%5%4%3%3%5%3%5% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 11%8%2%9%2%8%10%8% 6%8%38%8%19%10%6%9% 35%35%28%31%28%36%20%33% 44%47%28%48%44%41%65%45% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 4%2%4%5%7%5%0%4% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 10%8%19%6%6%9%9%9% 15%11%28%19%13%14%12%14% 1%0%0%3%5%2%0%2% 16%21%30%18%18%21%14%20% 58%59%23%54%58%55%65%57% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 392022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 516 of 810 Drones Approval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 2%1%4%6%2%16%13%3%10%9% 1%5%12%5%14%11%3%6%10%9% 44%34%15%41%42%34%42%38%34%35% 51%51%59%42%37%37%37%47%41%42% 0%2%0%1%1%0%0%0%0%0% 2%8%10%4%4%1%4%6%5%5% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 1%2%9%3%3%16%13%6%9%8% 1%24%8%4%7%9%4%12%8%9% 36%19%24%37%42%36%33%33%33%33% 60%46%55%52%42%38%47%47%45%45% 0%0%1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 1%9%3%4%6%1%3%2%5%4% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 1%0%2%3%6%16%12%3%10%9% 2%26%21%10%13%16%6%17%13%14% 0%3%1%1%4%0%2%2%2%2% 12%15%24%29%24%16%16%17%21%20% 84%56%53%58%54%52%64%61%55%57% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 402022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 517 of 810 Drones Approval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 9%12%10%6%3%52%10%5%5%3%14%9% 8%10%9%11%5%9%9%11%4%10%7%9% 35%34%30%32%47%21%32%36%45%24%38%35% 45%39%40%45%41%12%45%43%40%42%39%42% 0%0%1%1%0%0%0%0%0%0%2%0% 3%5%10%6%4%5%4%4%5%20%1%5% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 9%12%1%9%1%56%11%7%4%3%1%8% 8%12%14%9%7%2%11%7%6%15%10%9% 31%25%35%30%52%18%25%35%48%30%37%33% 45%48%47%51%36%20%47%48%38%48%50%45% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 6%3%3%2%5%4%5%3%4%3%2%4% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 5%14%8%7%4%52%10%6%5%12%6%9% 15%12%9%13%19%10%17%12%16%12%5%14% 2%2%1%1%2%0%3%1%2%0%2%2% 13%20%32%25%14%14%14%22%16%30%31%20% 64%52%50%54%60%24%56%59%60%45%56%57% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 412022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 518 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 12%14%0%9%5%0%13%5%0%6%0%0%9% 11%14%0%10%0%0%8%7%22%10%0%0%9% 22%36%7%35%36%61%35%35%9%36%50%69%35% 45%24%8%43%59%39%42%45%67%45%50%28%42% 2%0%0%0%0%0%1%0%0%0%0%0%0% 8%12%85%2%0%0%1%9%2%3%0%3%5% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 9%12%0%14%3%0%12%5%0%4%0%0%8% 5%9%7%5%0%0%21%6%2%7%2%5%9% 26%44%67%25%27%61%28%39%29%36%27%51%33% 48%25%8%54%69%39%37%44%67%52%72%45%45% 1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 11%9%18%2%1%0%3%6%2%0%0%0%4% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 9%16%0%10%3%0%11%5%0%10%0%0%9% 8%7%7%11%8%0%32%10%14%5%4%5%14% 3%2%18%2%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%2% 23%26%67%19%18%0%19%12%28%19%24%17%20% 57%49%8%58%70%100%37%68%58%65%72%78%57% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 422022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 519 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 10%11%16%8%4%0%9% 8%18%10%8%2%0%9% 30%33%16%35%48%54%35% 46%36%33%44%45%45%42% 0%0%0%1%0%0%0% 7%3%25%4%0%1%5% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 10%13%16%7%2%0%8% 19%9%6%9%5%2%9% 16%39%37%32%31%58%33% 51%31%34%49%61%38%45% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 4%8%7%3%0%1%4% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 8%13%20%7%4%0%9% 21%21%8%11%5%10%14% 1%2%6%1%0%0%2% 20%19%30%21%20%0%20% 49%45%36%59%71%90%57% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 432022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 520 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 40%17%5%3%9% 21%12%11%2%9% 17%41%40%30%35% 20%24%38%62%42% 0%0%0%0%0% 2%5%6%3%5% 27 86 261 214 607 42%13%6%3%8% 6%25%6%3%9% 29%36%43%20%33% 21%22%41%72%45% 0%0%0%0%0% 1%4%4%3%4% 27 86 261 214 607 42%19%4%3%9% 6%22%14%9%14% 1%2%1%1%2% 17%14%24%18%20% 33%43%57%69%57% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 442022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 521 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 13%4%10%11%3%9% 11%8%9%12%0%9% 15%46%40%35%33%35% 53%39%37%37%57%42% 0%0%1%1%0%0% 8%4%3%5%6%5% 88 115 95 216 87 607 11%5%11%10%3%8% 8%13%15%7%1%9% 15%36%30%44%23%33% 57%40%38%38%71%45% 1%0%0%0%0%0% 8%6%6%2%2%4% 88 115 95 216 87 607 15%6%10%10%2%9% 6%22%19%14%3%14% 2%2%2%2%1%2% 20%15%19%23%18%20% 57%55%51%53%76%57% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 452022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 522 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 28%5%3%1%5%9% 5%24%11%8%51%9% 57%53%56%20%0%35% 6%18%16%70%32%42% 1%0%0%0%0%0% 3%0%14%1%12%5% 31 22 85 157 9 607 29%8%3%4%4%8% 29%42%5%5%54%9% 22%21%60%23%5%33% 15%27%21%67%32%45% 0%0%1%0%0%0% 6%2%11%1%4%4% 31 22 85 157 9 607 22%11%4%2%46%9% 35%41%10%15%7%14% 3%0%2%0%4%2% 19%24%28%11%10%20% 22%25%55%73%32%57% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 462022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 523 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 79%3%15%5%11%12%9% 0%0%2%3%11%24%9% 13%48%30%35%40%37%35% 8%50%41%52%31%24%42% 0%0%0%0%2%0%0% 0%0%12%4%5%4%5% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 85%3%2%3%16%0%8% 0%30%5%6%7%2%9% 0%33%36%31%41%47%33% 15%34%52%57%33%36%45% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 0%0%5%3%3%15%4% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 79%3%2%4%18%0%9% 5%47%4%11%9%5%14% 0%0%5%1%2%2%2% 7%31%34%18%18%35%20% 8%20%55%66%53%58%57% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 472022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 524 of 810 Drones Approval - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES TOTAL Heard police use drones Personal experience/ Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surv eillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don' t know Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF DRONE USAGE Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 17%15%29%4%4%5%9% 3%14%20%0%13%8%9% 33%27%16%23%28%42%35% 44%43%9%65%53%41%42% 0%1%3%0%1%0%0% 3%1%24%8%1%4%5% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 16%11%31%1%2%6%8% 6%5%11%6%17%8%9% 27%43%43%20%26%35%33% 48%31%12%66%53%47%45% 1%0%0%0%0%0%0% 2%9%3%7%2%4%4% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 18%12%37%0%6%4%9% 10%22%5%6%17%14%14% 1%1%3%7%1%1%2% 13%19%36%8%19%21%20% 58%46%20%79%57%60%57% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 482022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 525 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 13%29%0%13%16%24%31%32%20% 25%13%45%24%19%16%9%10%20% 17%20%10%25%16%21%21%15%18% 9%4%0%6%7%9%8%8%7% 7%4%12%3%9%3%2%6%6% 3%8%0%0%15%8%2%5%5% 3%6%0%9%5%2%4%8%5% 14%12%0%17%9%15%19%15%13% 10%4%33%3%4%2%3%2%7% 226 251 9 31 63 108 107 159 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 492022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 526 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 17%24%29%13%17%17%34%20% 13%18%4%31%32%24%0%20% 25%16%9%20%9%17%22%18% 10%4%4%8%8%6%9%7% 7%6%0%6%0%6%3%6% 6%6%21%1%1%4%12%5% 3%6%7%0%7%5%6%5% 15%11%11%19%7%12%15%13% 3%8%15%1%19%8%0%7% 191 176 18 46 37 448 26 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 502022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 527 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 27%20%23%10%18%15%31%14%22%20% 6%25%22%18%17%24%18%24%18%20% 12%18%23%24%18%13%17%19%18%18% 24%12%4%8%3%5%5%14%4%7% 0%8%3%11%5%6%3%8%5%6% 0%1%9%1%14%5%5%6%5%5% 10%1%7%9%2%3%6%2%6%5% 3%14%8%7%21%20%12%12%13%13% 17%2%1%12%3%9%2%1%8%7% 24 41 53 56 73 106 93 77 400 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Approval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 16%26%16%21%27%35%17%21%27%22%14%20% 17%19%23%23%18%0%16%26%11%41%13%20% 26%11%16%13%19%28%24%14%19%14%14%18% 9%8%5%6%0%15%11%5%3%0%7%7% 7%6%2%6%4%7%8%6%3%2%1%6% 4%2%17%5%5%0%4%4%6%5%20%5% 5%2%12%3%3%0%1%6%4%4%15%5% 10%23%8%15%9%15%15%11%16%10%10%13% 5%1%1%8%14%0%5%6%13%3%6%7% 143 79 67 105 64 12 172 146 73 26 48 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 512022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 528 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 24%16%0%13%12%34%13%39%57%13%27%40%20% 14%19%0%18%20%55%32%6%3%16%25%0%20% 18%13%0%23%0%3%23%15%3%30%2%0%18% 5%13%0%3%19%3%8%1%0%7%14%0%7% 10%3%0%7%1%0%4%7%0%12%3%0%6% 2%3%52%2%12%0%8%14%6%3%0%0%5% 18%2%0%5%11%3%0%3%6%7%0%0%5% 6%23%48%17%24%3%9%13%24%3%26%17%13% 3%6%0%13%1%0%2%2%0%10%4%43%7% 51 51 2 72 33 10 97 54 16 64 16 8 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 24%18%25%20%20%21%20% 21%13%16%23%15%26%20% 23%22%6%21%7%17%18% 10%6%4%5%8%8%7% 8%12%11%3%2%0%6% 3%10%13%4%3%3%5% 5%2%4%5%8%3%5% 4%15%20%15%18%0%13% 2%2%2%4%17%21%7% 68 91 27 190 73 27 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 522022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 529 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 8%14%19%27%20% 13%37%16%16%20% 28%19%18%16%18% 4%6%6%8%7% 0%0%4%7%6% 9%2%8%5%5% 3%2%5%6%5% 35%9%16%9%13% 0%9%7%7%7% 14 50 207 195 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 532022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 530 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 24%23%9%18%33%20% 15%23%20%20%17%20% 11%17%24%18%18%18% 5%3%6%8%8%7% 7%2%9%7%2%6% 2%12%8%3%3%5% 14%3%1%5%6%5% 19%15%11%16%4%13% 3%1%13%5%9%7% 64 94 73 165 78 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 542022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 531 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 2%15%14%27%20%20% 34%45%15%7%0%20% 16%6%18%30%80%18% 2%0%8%10%0%7% 0%9%2%3%0%6% 6%3%3%3%0%5% 4%16%8%4%0%5% 32%5%17%14%0%13% 3%2%16%2%0%7% 15 14 66 146 2 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 552022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 532 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%7%16%18%27%17%20% 0%17%33%23%20%49%20% 22%45%15%12%7%3%18% 78%0%4%4%8%0%7% 0%17%7%10%2%17%6% 0%0%1%10%9%2%5% 0%0%9%5%1%5%5% 0%13%8%11%11%7%13% 0%0%5%7%15%0%7% 4 8 52 91 67 12 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 562022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 533 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES TOTAL Heard police use drones Personal experience/ Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surv eillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don' t know Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 17%17%12%20%37%18%20% 15%20%23%27%27%18%20% 10%34%34%23%16%17%18% 2%3%13%3%8%8%7% 11%5%5%2%2%6%6% 8%9%4%0%4%5%5% 14%2%0%5%1%4%5% 21%10%10%19%6%13%13% 2%1%0%2%0%11%7% 78 58 15 29 67 230 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 572022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 534 of 810 Reasons for Drones Approval - Attitudinals DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF DRONE PROGRAM Police/Public safety Crime scene monitoring/surveillance Aid police investigation Find missing persons/criminals Helicopter replacement Improve response times Useful tool/technology Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%13%0%20%22%20% 0%26%0%23%18%20% 0%21%0%10%19%18% 0%1%0%11%7%7% 0%2%0%9%6%6% 0%12%0%2%5%5% 0%3%0%5%5%5% 0%19%0%20%11%13% 0%4%0%0%9%7% 0 68 0 52 357 477 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 582022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 535 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 47%39%0%31%42%63%67%57%42% 32%33%0%30%48%28%30%30%33% 6%14%100%13%0%0%0%0%10% 9%13%0%19%10%9%0%14%12% 6%1%0%7%0%0%3%0%3% 37 55 1 14 21 20 21 15 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 45%44%9%40%79%42%47%42% 41%23%50%60%6%30%53%33% 0%17%0%0%0%12%0%10% 14%10%41%0%15%13%0%12% 0%6%0%0%0%3%0%3% 35 35 3 7 6 89 3 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 592022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 536 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%79%48%55%52%35%22%55%41%42% 36%21%13%7%15%33%78%27%33%33% 0%0%17%28%0%19%0%0%12%10% 34%0%21%10%15%13%0%17%11%12% 30%0%0%0%18%0%0%0%3%3% 3 3 8 11 13 23 15 15 77 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 44%20%21%64%100%9%28%68%73%43%9%42% 31%22%76%10%0%28%39%9%27%46%91%33% 11%30%0%7%0%63%8%6%0%0%0%10% 13%28%4%9%0%0%25%8%0%11%0%12% 0%0%0%10%0%0%0%9%0%0%0%3% 26 15 11 28 7 5 31 34 10 5 7 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 602022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 537 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 44%49%0%37%40%0%37%44%23%55%0%0%42% 12%15%0%57%27%0%52%24%0%30%0%0%33% 19%31%0%0%0%0%0%27%0%0%0%0%10% 7%5%0%7%33%0%10%5%77%16%0%0%12% 19%0%0%0%0%0%1%0%0%0%0%0%3% 16 14 0 12 3 0 23 9 3 12 0 0 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 53%32%36%46%64%0%42% 29%42%0%37%30%0%33% 0%8%64%0%0%0%10% 17%10%0%16%0%0%12% 0%8%0%0%6%0%3% 21 26 6 32 6 0 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 612022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 538 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 7%40%55%70%42% 18%55%18%30%33% 45%0%7%0%10% 30%4%13%0%12% 0%1%7%0%3% 11 29 39 10 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 52%63%32%34%88%42% 24%14%10%55%12%33% 0%0%46%0%0%10% 22%22%11%6%0%12% 2%0%0%6%0%3% 19 14 14 39 3 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 622022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 539 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 41%39%83%38%82%42% 51%14%13%34%18%33% 0%0%0%24%0%10% 8%48%0%5%0%12% 0%0%4%0%0%3% 14 8 12 8 4 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%0%15%57%31%66%42% 78%100%74%17%25%0%33% 0%0%0%0%28%29%10% 22%0%11%26%4%5%12% 0%0%0%0%12%0%3% 3 1 7 14 16 5 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 632022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 540 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES TOTAL Heard police use drones Personal experience/ Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surv eillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don' t know Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 40%51%26%100%64%39%42% 60%20%28%0%3%40%33% 0%16%32%0%0%6%10% 0%13%13%0%10%16%12% 0%0%0%0%23%0%3% 11 15 16 1 13 36 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 642022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 541 of 810 Reasons for Drones Disapproval - Attitudinals DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total REASONS TO OPPOSE DRONE PROGRAM Privacy concerns Police/Government misuse Waste of resources Other Nothing/Don't know n= 38%46%0%47%0%42% 42%54%0%21%0%33% 11%0%0%10%0%10% 9%0%0%15%0%12% 0%0%0%6%0%3% 46 3 0 43 0 92 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Drone Benefits - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 1%5%8%5%2%1%2%0%3% 4%2%0%9%3%3%1%0%3% 2%2%0%2%4%1%1%2%2% 22%24%44%30%18%18%19%16%23% 31%24%38%11%30%24%43%28%28% 39%43%10%42%43%53%34%54%41% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 1%6%8%5%3%2%2%1%4% 1%4%0%4%3%4%1%3%3% 4%4%0%9%7%1%3%2%4% 24%18%36%25%17%16%23%14%21% 35%30%46%17%42%21%46%34%33% 35%37%10%40%28%55%25%47%36% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 652022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 542 of 810 Drone Benefits - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%3%2%0%5%4%0%3% 3%1%20%6%0%4%0%3% 2%1%0%2%2%2%0%2% 21%22%27%21%41%25%13%23% 22%37%22%19%13%24%49%28% 49%36%28%51%38%42%39%41% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 5%4%2%1%5%4%0%4% 4%2%0%2%2%3%0%3% 3%2%18%11%2%5%0%4% 15%21%28%17%40%22%18%21% 27%39%19%32%18%29%51%33% 46%33%33%37%32%37%30%36% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 662022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 543 of 810 Drone Benefits - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 1%1%1%0%2%10%0%1%4%3% 0%0%1%6%0%6%1%2%4%3% 0%7%1%0%4%1%1%1%2%2% 10%25%31%28%21%26%14%23%23%23% 42%42%31%31%19%17%39%37%25%28% 47%25%35%35%53%41%45%36%42%41% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 1%1%2%1%3%10%1%1%4%4% 0%0%5%3%3%3%2%3%3%3% 0%7%0%0%6%6%4%2%4%4% 5%19%23%28%20%26%14%20%21%21% 44%48%41%37%29%16%42%44%30%33% 50%26%29%30%39%39%38%30%38%36% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 672022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 544 of 810 Drone Benefits - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%7%0%3%1%39%2%3%2%0%1%3% 6%1%6%1%1%0%5%1%1%3%7%3% 3%2%2%0%2%0%2%2%3%1%3%2% 15%30%26%28%21%26%21%23%25%37%20%23% 30%22%21%30%28%15%27%33%27%10%24%28% 43%38%45%37%46%20%43%38%43%50%45%41% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 3%8%1%4%2%39%3%3%2%0%1%4% 1%1%2%4%4%0%1%4%4%3%1%3% 7%7%2%1%4%2%7%2%5%2%2%4% 15%21%32%24%17%29%16%20%21%40%29%21% 36%30%29%28%38%11%34%35%35%15%34%33% 38%34%34%39%34%19%39%36%32%40%33%36% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 682022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 545 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%9%0%1%1%0%5%0%0%1%0%0%3% 6%1%0%7%0%0%3%3%0%2%0%0%3% 3%4%18%2%2%0%2%0%0%1%0%0%2% 17%36%7%16%16%0%28%20%31%19%34%51%23% 27%25%67%38%21%60%19%34%46%21%46%2%28% 45%24%8%36%60%40%43%42%23%55%20%47%41% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 5%11%0%2%1%0%6%0%0%2%0%0%4% 3%4%0%2%0%0%2%8%0%2%0%0%3% 2%5%18%8%2%3%2%2%2%7%0%0%4% 18%32%59%15%12%0%27%14%12%15%18%68%21% 27%30%15%44%16%61%25%41%66%29%51%0%33% 45%19%8%29%68%36%38%35%19%44%32%32%36% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 692022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 546 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 4%0%20%2%0%0%3% 2%9%0%2%1%0%3% 3%1%6%2%0%0%2% 21%21%31%24%25%19%23% 25%34%19%27%25%33%28% 44%35%24%42%48%48%41% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 6%1%20%2%1%0%4% 3%4%4%2%1%0%3% 2%5%8%4%3%0%4% 18%19%28%25%13%26%21% 28%48%16%26%39%33%33% 43%22%25%41%43%41%36% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 702022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 547 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 32%0%2%1%3% 0%4%5%1%3% 3%3%2%0%2% 34%47%19%12%23% 9%23%38%19%28% 22%23%34%67%41% 27 86 261 214 607 35%2%3%1%4% 7%6%2%1%3% 4%3%6%2%4% 20%36%18%16%21% 19%29%43%23%33% 15%24%29%57%36% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 712022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 548 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 8%1%6%1%2%3% 2%1%2%5%1%3% 7%2%2%1%0%2% 12%20%34%26%14%23% 18%32%25%31%28%28% 52%43%32%36%55%41% 88 115 95 216 87 607 9%2%6%2%2%4% 3%4%3%2%2%3% 6%7%2%5%0%4% 7%19%22%25%23%21% 29%34%35%37%24%33% 45%34%32%30%48%36% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 722022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 549 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 5%2%1%0%0%3% 6%2%2%6%5%3% 2%0%5%0%4%2% 64%25%34%12%53%23% 11%64%35%26%0%28% 13%7%22%55%38%41% 31 22 85 157 9 607 9%2%2%0%0%4% 11%6%0%2%5%3% 1%0%5%5%28%4% 59%15%37%7%29%21% 6%48%32%36%0%33% 14%28%23%49%38%36% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 732022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 550 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 17%0%0%2%11%0%3% 0%0%0%2%0%10%3% 7%0%5%1%1%3%2% 7%30%31%15%23%26%23% 58%41%13%33%19%38%28% 10%30%51%48%47%22%41% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 17%0%0%3%11%0%4% 0%0%2%3%0%8%3% 13%0%7%2%1%5%4% 0%33%16%16%29%30%21% 65%41%26%42%22%37%33% 4%27%50%35%37%21%36% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 742022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 551 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES TOTAL Heard police use drones Personal experience/ Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surv eillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don' t know Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%10%21%0%1%0%3% 2%5%5%0%0%4%3% 2%0%5%7%0%2%2% 18%29%37%11%11%26%23% 28%21%18%10%34%30%28% 48%36%14%72%53%38%41% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 3%10%21%0%2%1%4% 2%4%5%4%3%2%3% 3%3%11%7%3%4%4% 21%21%41%9%6%23%21% 28%27%12%20%37%37%33% 43%35%10%60%50%32%36% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 752022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 552 of 810 Drone Benefits - Attitudinals DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total ARRIVES AND PROVIDES LIVE FEED MINUTES BEFORE POLICE ARRIVAL Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= HELPS DE-ESCALATE AND RESOLVE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 31%0%0%1%0%3% 13%8%9%4%0%3% 3%1%41%3%0%2% 38%35%13%33%15%23% 15%30%37%25%30%28% 0%26%0%34%55%41% 46 79 12 113 357 607 36%1%0%2%0%4% 7%3%0%7%0%3% 7%9%41%5%1%4% 34%28%22%36%12%21% 16%44%37%23%36%33% 0%15%0%28%50%36% 46 79 12 113 357 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 762022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 553 of 810 Drone Concerns - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 20%19%0%22%16%28%15%32%20% 23%13%40%18%11%18%13%18%18% 2%0%0%2%1%1%0%1%1% 31%26%28%27%30%17%42%32%29% 12%15%16%9%19%15%13%9%13% 12%26%16%22%24%22%18%8%19% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 24%24%20%13%21%33%22%37%24% 19%14%10%14%22%15%16%19%16% 3%0%0%2%1%2%3%1%1% 23%20%8%22%21%17%33%25%22% 16%12%38%7%14%13%10%10%14% 15%30%24%42%22%20%16%7%22% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 772022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 554 of 810 Drone Concerns - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 23%19%17%22%15%19%23%20% 21%16%7%20%30%21%8%18% 1%1%0%2%2%1%0%1% 24%33%24%29%11%26%42%29% 10%15%6%16%9%15%7%13% 21%15%45%11%34%19%20%19% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 25%27%15%20%21%22%34%24% 20%14%9%24%13%16%16%16% 1%1%0%3%2%2%0%1% 22%19%22%32%15%22%21%22% 11%17%11%7%21%15%9%14% 22%23%42%14%28%23%20%22% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 782022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 555 of 810 Drone Concerns - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 39%16%17%14%11%28%21%21%19%20% 10%24%13%34%12%14%23%23%17%18% 0%6%0%0%2%0%0%0%1%1% 27%29%30%33%38%27%21%33%27%29% 23%7%18%9%23%9%15%8%15%13% 1%17%22%10%15%22%21%14%20%19% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 45%22%24%30%14%23%27%23%25%24% 11%12%16%11%23%10%26%24%14%16% 2%6%0%1%3%0%0%0%2%1% 20%18%16%30%21%30%12%24%21%22% 21%23%12%16%15%14%10%15%14%14% 1%19%32%13%24%23%24%14%25%22% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 792022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 556 of 810 Drone Concerns - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 21%23%26%18%12%13%23%19%10%39%20%20% 24%19%10%13%25%12%20%17%25%8%13%18% 2%0%2%1%0%0%0%2%0%0%3%1% 26%17%23%36%37%7%24%33%35%14%31%29% 12%13%19%12%19%2%11%12%20%27%12%13% 16%28%19%20%6%66%22%17%10%12%22%19% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 28%27%22%25%16%15%30%22%17%27%25%24% 17%15%20%13%23%9%15%19%13%12%23%16% 2%1%2%1%1%0%1%2%2%0%4%1% 23%19%18%22%23%10%21%21%30%27%10%22% 14%10%7%17%23%3%12%16%23%6%6%14% 16%27%30%23%13%63%22%20%15%28%32%22% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 802022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 557 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 23%16%0%23%43%39%17%20%14%17%5%19%20% 14%8%15%21%11%55%10%23%8%32%16%42%18% 0%4%18%0%5%0%1%0%0%0%0%0%1% 37%26%59%34%16%3%28%34%62%17%55%2%29% 6%27%7%8%21%3%14%8%14%19%3%13%13% 20%19%0%15%5%0%30%15%2%14%21%24%19% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 32%13%0%28%62%38%13%25%18%29%26%21%24% 14%14%8%14%1%58%12%31%33%19%14%0%16% 0%6%18%0%5%0%1%1%0%1%0%0%1% 20%25%74%27%9%0%24%23%26%18%22%2%22% 10%15%0%13%20%0%17%10%9%11%3%55%14% 25%28%0%17%3%3%34%10%14%22%36%22%22% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 812022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 558 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 25%6%10%23%31%23%20% 14%17%6%21%13%48%18% 0%0%2%1%3%0%1% 30%48%29%20%25%8%29% 10%10%23%13%21%8%13% 21%19%30%22%7%13%19% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 31%14%12%28%38%8%24% 19%23%19%13%5%28%16% 0%1%4%2%2%0%1% 12%34%18%21%19%13%22% 20%8%6%11%24%25%14% 18%19%42%25%13%25%22% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 822022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 559 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 6%9%18%32%20% 6%11%13%32%18% 0%0%2%0%1% 18%36%36%16%29% 16%13%19%7%13% 55%31%13%13%19% 27 86 261 214 607 6%13%18%45%24% 6%10%19%16%16% 0%1%2%1%1% 13%15%30%16%22% 5%22%15%9%14% 70%39%15%14%22% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 832022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 560 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 28%13%16%16%34%20% 12%20%13%18%29%18% 4%2%1%0%1%1% 19%36%32%31%17%29% 7%15%11%18%8%13% 30%14%28%16%10%19% 88 115 95 216 87 607 33%24%18%19%39%24% 14%27%14%14%16%16% 6%2%1%0%0%1% 11%16%22%28%19%22% 8%20%13%14%12%14% 28%11%32%25%14%22% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 842022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 561 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 4%6%6%36%7%20% 8%5%15%18%26%18% 0%4%4%0%4%1% 6%69%32%24%30%29% 19%4%32%7%24%13% 63%12%11%15%9%19% 31 22 85 157 9 607 6%1%6%41%27%24% 1%11%15%15%26%16% 0%0%5%0%4%1% 9%13%24%24%34%22% 24%52%21%5%5%14% 61%22%29%15%4%22% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 852022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 562 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%53%26%16%14%17%20% 0%0%25%26%15%32%18% 0%0%4%0%0%2%1% 4%44%22%36%30%8%29% 0%3%8%14%12%27%13% 92%0%16%9%28%15%19% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 0%20%37%27%18%20%24% 4%17%19%26%8%30%16% 0%0%5%0%2%2%1% 11%44%9%25%22%16%22% 0%19%5%13%15%27%14% 85%0%25%8%36%6%22% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 862022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 563 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA DRONES TOTAL Heard police use drones Personal experience/ Seen the drones flying Privacy/Surv eillance concerns Read/Seen news stories Other Nothing/Don' t know Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 28%16%5%33%22%19%20% 21%13%2%29%14%21%18% 0%0%0%0%1%2%1% 14%31%18%22%39%31%29% 17%15%29%14%14%10%13% 20%24%47%1%10%18%19% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 31%25%6%20%26%24%24% 19%11%3%31%16%17%16% 0%1%0%0%1%2%1% 16%34%23%29%27%19%22% 11%8%7%10%19%16%14% 24%22%61%10%11%22%22% 93 76 35 32 83 288 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 872022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 564 of 810 Drone Concerns - Attitudinals DRONE APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total MIGHT RECORD VIDEO OF INNOCENT PEOPLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= FOOTAGE MIGHT BE SHARED WITH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OR IMMIGRATION Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 0%5%0%12%30%20% 0%8%0%20%24%18% 0%0%9%4%0%1% 9%48%37%21%29%29% 16%12%16%20%11%13% 75%26%38%23%7%19% 46 79 12 113 357 607 5%9%9%22%32%24% 2%8%6%10%23%16% 0%0%29%5%0%1% 9%39%0%20%20%22% 9%18%0%14%14%14% 74%26%56%29%10%22% 46 79 12 113 357 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 882022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 565 of 810 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 6%10%8%14%4%5%9%7%8% 3%5%0%10%5%1%4%3%4% 2%2%0%9%1%1%1%1%2% 0%3%0%2%2%2%2%1%2% 4%8%8%2%7%8%6%5%6% 84%72%84%64%80%83%79%82%78% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 19%4%18%6%2%9%3%8% 4%4%0%7%0%5%0%4% 2%1%0%6%4%3%0%2% 2%1%0%1%4%2%0%2% 7%6%8%4%3%6%5%6% 67%83%74%74%86%76%92%78% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 892022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 566 of 810 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 10%0%3%16%3%8%12%8%8%8% 1%3%3%0%7%6%6%2%4%4% 0%0%0%1%4%7%1%5%2%2% 0%0%0%3%1%2%3%2%1%2% 8%1%17%3%7%2%7%5%6%6% 81%96%77%77%78%75%71%77%79%78% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 11%8%7%4%11%2%13%3%10%9%4%8% 1%4%6%4%5%2%2%5%6%2%7%4% 1%0%9%3%0%3%1%2%0%18%1%2% 2%2%1%0%1%0%2%1%3%1%1%2% 7%4%11%5%4%3%6%5%5%18%5%6% 77%81%66%84%79%89%76%84%75%52%81%78% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 902022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 567 of 810 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 6%8%0%7%3%3%14%1%2%12%4%0%8% 4%2%0%9%2%3%3%5%5%3%3%0%4% 0%0%0%0%0%7%8%3%0%0%0%0%2% 7%0%0%0%0%0%1%4%0%1%0%0%2% 7%12%0%2%12%0%5%5%5%10%0%0%6% 75%79%100%81%84%87%70%81%88%73%94%100%78% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 10%11%3%7%1%15%8% 1%4%6%6%1%2%4% 1%0%4%2%7%1%2% 5%2%0%1%1%0%2% 8%3%17%6%6%0%6% 74%80%70%78%84%82%78% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 912022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 568 of 810 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 2%10%8%5%8% 3%3%4%5%4% 4%0%5%0%2% 4%3%1%1%2% 8%8%7%4%6% 78%76%75%84%78% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 6%14%2%10%5%8% 4%1%1%6%5%4% 5%0%0%3%4%2% 1%1%1%2%3%2% 12%3%6%7%2%6% 71%80%90%71%82%78% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 922022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 569 of 810 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 7%1%7%10%26%8% 0%2%0%2%0%4% 1%3%1%0%0%2% 6%4%1%0%0%2% 5%5%11%9%0%6% 80%85%80%79%74%78% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 932022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 570 of 810 Exposure to License Plate Reader Program - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Government overreach Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%0%4%10%7%3%8% 0%0%10%5%10%0%4% 7%0%1%6%4%0%2% 0%3%5%1%1%0%2% 5%0%12%2%3%7%6% 87%97%69%76%76%90%78% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 LPR Approval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 12%24%28%22%12%21%10%15%18% 16%10%28%17%14%7%6%10%13% 26%24%18%30%29%20%22%26%25% 40%37%18%24%39%47%58%42%38% 2%2%8%5%0%0%0%1%2% 5%3%0%2%6%4%4%7%4% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 8%19%26%17%11%13%7%12%14% 20%9%20%25%15%8%9%11%15% 27%28%26%21%36%20%33%29%27% 39%39%28%30%36%50%46%42%39% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 6%5%0%7%2%9%5%6%5% 279 326 11 46 91 135 142 180 605 13%19%28%23%14%13%7%12%16% 18%12%8%17%16%9%22%16%15% 3%1%0%5%1%3%1%2%2% 19%22%28%22%16%23%16%19%20% 47%47%36%33%54%52%55%50%47% 279 326 11 46 91 135 142 180 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 942022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 571 of 810 LPR Approval - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 20%18%21%10%14%19%13%18% 10%14%13%11%21%15%2%13% 27%19%42%38%28%29%6%25% 38%44%18%31%27%30%77%38% 0%2%0%6%1%2%0%2% 5%3%6%4%9%4%2%4% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 16%13%16%3%27%15%9%14% 10%15%36%20%8%17%6%15% 27%26%19%32%36%29%17%27% 43%42%20%34%29%34%62%39% 1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 3%5%10%11%0%5%6%5% 240 222 23 55 45 572 30 605 17%15%23%11%18%18%6%16% 9%16%27%17%19%14%19%15% 2%0%4%8%0%3%0%2% 20%21%17%23%12%22%9%20% 51%48%29%42%51%43%65%47% 240 222 23 55 45 572 30 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 952022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 572 of 810 LPR Approval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 3%26%10%16%19%20%21%26%15%18% 14%8%15%22%11%13%9%13%13%13% 6%11%23%19%36%29%29%23%25%25% 58%48%43%39%30%33%38%35%39%38% 15%1%0%1%0%4%0%0%3%2% 3%6%9%3%3%2%3%3%4%4% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 9%18%12%11%17%13%12%18%13%14% 2%15%10%14%7%18%22%18%14%15% 37%18%31%17%42%31%18%21%29%27% 51%42%40%55%28%31%43%34%40%39% 1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 0%7%7%2%6%7%5%9%4%5% 28 47 65 71 91 132 115 102 503 605 3%18%9%19%19%19%13%22%14%16% 16%21%21%6%14%13%15%16%14%15% 1%0%1%1%2%5%1%1%3%2% 26%20%17%31%18%16%24%18%21%20% 54%41%51%43%48%47%47%43%48%47% 28 47 65 71 91 132 115 102 503 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 962022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 573 of 810 LPR Approval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 24%29%9%13%10%57%20%17%15%15%6%18% 6%18%14%19%8%6%10%17%10%20%8%13% 20%16%37%18%48%15%18%21%41%29%36%25% 42%29%33%45%32%15%42%40%30%31%44%38% 7%0%0%0%0%0%6%0%0%0%0%2% 1%9%6%5%2%7%3%4%3%4%6%4% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 15%30%7%10%5%57%17%9%14%10%6%14% 13%15%22%12%17%6%11%18%14%19%19%15% 25%16%31%28%43%16%23%29%34%31%25%27% 42%29%35%44%32%11%44%39%31%34%46%39% 0%0%0%1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 4%10%6%5%2%10%5%4%7%6%4%5% 178 102 83 142 74 19 215 190 90 35 56 605 15%25%16%13%10%60%15%14%15%28%6%16% 9%23%15%16%20%12%13%15%20%1%21%15% 4%2%4%1%0%7%4%1%1%4%3%2% 22%18%11%22%24%6%20%26%21%9%11%20% 50%33%55%47%45%15%49%44%43%58%59%47% 178 102 83 142 74 19 215 190 90 35 56 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 972022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 574 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 26%29%0%6%18%55%24%12%2%17%3%3%18% 11%14%0%21%5%0%15%15%19%5%21%0%13% 28%26%23%25%11%6%24%23%23%29%15%55%25% 29%27%59%41%62%39%34%41%22%41%61%42%38% 1%1%0%6%0%0%0%0%0%7%0%0%2% 6%2%18%1%5%0%4%8%34%0%0%0%4% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 22%22%0%4%16%0%22%5%16%11%14%0%14% 8%14%7%14%3%55%21%18%19%7%19%2%15% 30%35%7%22%15%3%21%32%33%32%33%53%27% 34%25%67%50%61%42%29%40%22%50%34%45%39% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 6%4%18%10%5%0%6%5%10%2%0%0%5% 72 69 6 87 36 10 126 71 20 79 16 9 605 21%28%0%11%17%0%24%13%7%10%0%0%16% 12%6%7%11%5%0%26%8%36%10%49%2%15% 1%0%18%7%5%0%1%2%10%0%0%0%2% 26%18%8%19%11%58%16%21%12%32%12%3%20% 40%48%67%52%64%42%33%57%36%49%38%95%47% 72 69 6 87 36 10 126 71 20 79 16 9 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 982022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 575 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 31%17%21%14%11%24%18% 3%11%7%17%23%3%13% 21%20%35%30%12%41%25% 40%43%24%36%44%31%38% 0%5%0%0%7%0%2% 5%5%13%2%3%0%4% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 25%12%19%12%12%1%14% 8%14%9%14%24%24%15% 19%29%39%30%18%31%27% 41%37%27%38%45%44%39% 1%0%0%0%0%0%0% 6%9%7%5%2%0%5% 96 126 38 236 79 28 605 24%15%25%12%21%2%16% 17%16%2%19%13%2%15% 1%5%7%1%2%0%2% 21%15%11%22%20%36%20% 37%48%56%46%44%60%47% 96 126 38 236 79 28 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 992022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 576 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 53%29%16%5%18% 17%16%14%9%13% 8%28%27%25%25% 11%25%34%59%38% 0%0%5%0%2% 12%2%4%3%4% 27 86 261 214 607 40%33%9%2%14% 29%20%15%7%15% 10%13%39%25%27% 20%29%29%63%39% 0%0%0%0%0% 1%6%7%3%5% 27 86 260 214 605 47%31%14%4%16% 11%23%16%9%15% 0%1%4%1%2% 31%12%23%19%20% 10%33%44%67%47% 27 86 260 214 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1002022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 577 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 26%30%18%13%11%18% 6%6%23%13%12%13% 19%25%17%30%25%25% 43%34%34%37%49%38% 0%0%1%5%0%2% 6%6%7%2%2%4% 88 115 95 216 87 607 14%25%20%8%7%14% 12%9%20%19%5%15% 17%21%26%35%24%27% 46%37%29%34%61%39% 0%0%0%0%0%0% 11%8%5%4%3%5% 88 115 93 216 87 605 14%26%22%13%8%16% 10%11%23%17%7%15% 2%3%2%3%0%2% 26%17%16%22%21%20% 48%43%37%46%65%47% 88 115 93 216 87 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1012022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 578 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 62%54%15%2%59%18% 21%5%14%9%5%13% 15%5%48%17%0%25% 3%7%7%67%32%38% 0%0%9%4%0%2% 0%29%8%1%4%4% 31 22 85 157 9 607 78%49%5%4%33%14% 8%19%20%8%30%15% 9%22%60%15%0%27% 6%5%8%67%32%39% 0%2%1%0%0%0% 0%2%6%6%4%5% 31 22 85 157 9 605 53%45%8%5%38%16% 25%18%15%13%0%15% 0%2%3%5%4%2% 12%25%34%11%26%20% 11%11%41%65%32%47% 31 22 85 157 9 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1022022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 579 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 25%3%8%11%25%51%18% 12%7%9%20%14%3%13% 9%33%40%26%26%6%25% 55%57%34%40%32%37%38% 0%0%0%0%0%1%2% 0%0%8%3%2%2%4% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 7%3%8%6%18%22%14% 25%0%13%17%14%33%15% 10%60%31%28%29%19%27% 58%37%38%46%32%18%39% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 0%0%11%4%7%7%5% 7 9 64 114 88 19 605 15%3%8%16%21%23%16% 0%20%19%14%13%25%15% 0%0%5%0%0%2%2% 25%7%17%23%21%33%20% 60%71%52%47%44%18%47% 7 9 64 114 88 19 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1032022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 580 of 810 LPR Approval - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR TOTAL They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Go vernment overreach Other Nothing/Don' t know Total INITIAL APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= INFORMED APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Mixed Unsure n= LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve n= 20%8%42%76%14%16%18% 4%25%47%0%12%13%13% 32%27%5%15%34%24%25% 43%37%6%6%37%40%38% 0%0%0%0%0%3%2% 0%4%0%4%3%5%4% 53 23 12 13 45 461 607 19%8%34%65%8%12%14% 6%8%51%0%8%16%15% 13%41%6%20%46%27%27% 60%42%8%11%35%38%39% 0%0%0%0%0%0%0% 1%0%0%4%3%6%5% 53 23 12 13 45 459 605 15%15%81%65%12%13%16% 10%2%0%0%7%17%15% 0%0%0%4%1%3%2% 23%21%10%17%20%20%20% 52%62%9%15%61%46%47% 53 23 12 13 45 459 605 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1042022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 581 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 30%33%50%39%27%23%39%23%31% 11%24%0%11%17%11%28%24%17% 18%15%22%15%17%19%12%17%16% 8%6%0%11%9%3%3%13%7% 9%3%0%13%5%8%6%2%6% 18%18%0%11%21%35%10%18%18% 6%1%28%0%4%2%2%2%4% 197 202 4 25 54 87 102 127 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Approval - Demographics ETHNICITY Language TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Tagalog Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 26%37%19%29%19%34%23%100%31% 14%22%17%11%3%11%38%0%17% 29%12%0%17%15%19%9%0%16% 6%6%51%7%6%8%4%0%7% 1%7%0%12%7%5%10%0%6% 21%16%12%22%17%19%16%0%18% 3%1%0%2%33%5%0%0%4% 158 155 14 38 27 374 24 1 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1052022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 582 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 42%37%30%41%27%26%36%38%30%31% 27%8%18%12%36%7%13%13%18%17% 21%13%22%24%6%14%19%22%15%16% 5%13%1%2%2%14%6%12%6%7% 0%13%10%2%6%9%1%0%8%6% 3%13%20%19%18%22%23%14%19%18% 1%2%0%0%6%9%2%1%4%4% 18 31 46 45 63 91 75 59 340 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Approval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 30%26%32%36%32%48%27%34%36%45%21%31% 16%13%21%17%20%9%17%16%19%8%23%17% 23%25%7%13%14%26%22%18%10%19%5%16% 5%10%14%7%4%8%6%6%4%8%18%7% 6%2%13%5%3%0%5%6%1%0%23%6% 17%23%12%19%14%9%22%19%17%17%9%18% 3%0%1%2%14%0%1%2%13%3%0%4% 121 58 57 94 53 11 140 126 58 23 41 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1062022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 583 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 43%56%0%23%37%28%29%27%5%46%8%2%31% 3%5%81%13%10%66%10%43%42%4%31%36%17% 21%8%0%7%30%0%29%17%37%16%0%0%16% 7%4%10%7%11%0%9%0%11%5%25%17%7% 5%9%0%3%0%0%8%1%0%12%28%0%6% 19%17%9%46%12%6%14%10%4%16%3%0%18% 3%1%0%1%0%0%1%3%0%1%5%45%4% 42 41 4 62 28 9 76 46 11 59 12 8 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 50%31%33%34%19%10%31% 11%25%33%7%22%29%17% 19%17%16%14%22%12%16% 4%4%1%9%13%11%7% 3%1%0%13%7%2%6% 11%20%18%21%16%7%18% 2%2%0%2%1%30%4% 54 70 20 172 60 22 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1072022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 584 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 13%36%35%27%31% 0%5%20%18%17% 54%22%15%15%16% 0%4%10%6%7% 0%17%3%5%6% 27%16%16%21%18% 6%0%2%7%4% 8 41 160 181 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 36%39%33%37%12%31% 9%25%10%13%30%17% 20%15%12%20%11%16% 4%3%11%8%7%7% 11%5%12%5%1%6% 16%12%20%15%28%18% 3%1%2%2%11%4% 54 72 56 148 64 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1082022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 585 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%47%49%26%20%31% 0%0%9%17%80%17% 8%29%19%19%0%16% 16%0%4%7%0%7% 0%0%6%8%0%6% 77%12%12%21%0%18% 0%12%1%1%0%4% 6 7 48 130 2 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1092022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 586 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 14%52%48%33%17%39%31% 0%0%5%23%25%12%17% 0%19%11%18%15%4%16% 0%26%4%9%8%0%7% 0%0%19%1%5%8%6% 86%3%11%14%14%33%18% 0%0%2%3%15%3%4% 3 7 46 82 57 11 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1102022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 587 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR TOTAL They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Go vernment overreach Other Nothing/Don' t know Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 44%51%54%73%54%27%31% 13%9%0%27%5%19%17% 27%15%20%0%13%16%16% 2%2%0%0%0%9%7% 1%0%0%0%19%6%6% 14%23%25%0%9%19%18% 0%0%0%0%0%5%4% 38 14 4 3 29 311 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1112022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 588 of 810 Reasons for LPR Approval - Attitudinals LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Deter/Reduce/Solve crimes Promotes safety/security Find missing persons/criminals Helpful to police Help with traffic incidences Other Nothing/Don't know n= 0%29%0%35%32%31% 0%19%0%5%18%17% 0%13%0%23%17%16% 0%11%0%4%7%7% 0%10%0%0%6%6% 0%17%0%33%17%18% 0%2%0%0%4%4% 0 63 0 45 290 399 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1122022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 589 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 38%37%64%42%22%32%24%15%37% 22%29%0%18%28%38%53%44%25% 40%34%36%40%47%27%23%39%37% 0%1%0%0%3%2%0%2%1% 64 107 6 19 31 41 33 41 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Demographics ETHNICITY Language TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Tagalog Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 28%39%7%49%46%38%25%0%37% 33%16%64%43%24%26%16%100%25% 38%43%29%8%27%35%60%0%37% 0%1%0%0%3%1%0%0%1% 67 61 7 13 13 165 5 1 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1132022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 590 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 6%44%71%15%13%50%48%61%28%37% 51%10%16%17%35%33%27%20%28%25% 42%41%13%68%52%17%23%17%44%37% 0%5%0%0%0%0%2%2%1%1% 7 12 14 20 25 36 36 36 135 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 41%47%46%23%33%86%38%33%21%54%27%37% 30%30%15%18%37%8%33%17%42%18%21%25% 29%23%38%57%24%5%29%48%35%28%52%37% 0%0%0%2%6%0%0%2%2%0%0%1% 52 35 20 38 18 6 66 52 26 10 11 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1142022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 591 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 31%35%0%0%7%100%65%27%0%21%59%0%37% 31%24%0%19%20%0%23%34%100%26%12%100%25% 38%40%0%79%73%0%12%39%0%54%8%0%37% 0%0%0%2%0%0%0%0%0%0%20%0%1% 27 24 0 21 7 1 43 19 3 18 4 1 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 40%26%60%31%35%83%37% 43%36%27%17%20%5%25% 17%37%13%51%45%0%37% 0%0%0%1%0%12%1% 38 46 9 55 16 6 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1152022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 592 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 45%35%43%24%37% 22%23%29%21%25% 33%42%27%51%37% 0%0%1%4%1% 17 40 82 25 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 10%40%50%39%22%37% 52%30%9%32%10%25% 38%29%41%28%59%37% 0%0%0%0%8%1% 29 35 28 57 21 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1162022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 593 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 47%61%19%24%48%37% 20%26%41%36%12%25% 32%13%41%38%40%37% 0%0%0%2%0%1% 25 11 27 22 6 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 20%28%8%22%45%82%37% 68%0%20%26%23%3%25% 12%72%71%48%32%16%37% 0%0%0%3%0%0%1% 4 2 13 27 28 6 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1172022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 594 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR TOTAL They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Go vernment overreach Other Nothing/Don' t know Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 17%30%61%42%27%37%37% 50%35%31%28%7%23%25% 33%35%7%29%66%38%37% 0%0%0%0%0%1%1% 15 8 8 9 14 117 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1182022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 595 of 810 Reasons for LPR Disapproval - Attitudinals LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL OF LPR PROGRAM Police misuse Privacy concerns Other Nothing/Don't know n= 44%54%0%24%0%37% 24%23%0%29%0%25% 31%20%0%46%0%37% 0%3%0%1%0%1% 89 14 0 67 0 171 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 LPR Benefits - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 2%7%8%4%2%6%2%5%4% 4%5%10%5%2%4%2%4%4% 3%3%0%0%3%4%7%3%3% 17%20%28%20%18%16%18%16%19% 30%17%20%20%15%20%34%35%24% 44%48%34%51%60%50%37%37%46% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 2%8%8%7%2%7%3%3%5% 6%4%20%4%1%3%4%4%5% 4%3%0%2%7%5%3%2%3% 23%25%54%32%19%17%8%21%24% 32%19%10%25%22%24%47%27%26% 32%40%8%30%49%44%34%42%36% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1192022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 596 of 810 LPR Benefits - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 3%5%0%2%8%4%6%4% 6%5%0%1%0%5%2%4% 4%2%0%5%0%3%3%3% 16%17%30%20%32%19%17%19% 18%28%17%22%16%23%26%24% 54%43%53%50%45%46%45%46% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 6%5%0%2%5%5%4%5% 4%6%16%3%3%6%2%5% 5%2%11%3%3%4%0%3% 19%25%7%26%43%27%12%24% 22%28%36%26%22%25%33%26% 44%35%30%40%24%33%49%36% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1202022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 597 of 810 LPR Benefits - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 8%2%2%5%7%6%3%1%6%4% 0%1%2%11%5%6%1%3%5%4% 0%8%1%2%4%3%1%2%3%3% 7%32%31%9%11%20%16%32%15%19% 38%22%14%46%24%21%15%32%21%24% 48%35%49%27%49%44%65%30%51%46% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 1%1%6%4%10%7%3%3%6%5% 0%14%1%12%5%3%1%9%4%5% 2%2%4%0%4%4%3%4%3%3% 30%14%27%24%19%32%23%28%23%24% 38%31%30%34%25%19%19%35%23%26% 29%38%33%26%38%35%50%22%40%36% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1212022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 598 of 810 LPR Benefits - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 3%14%2%3%1%39%3%2%8%4%2%4% 2%3%5%8%5%2%2%6%5%8%1%4% 2%2%4%5%0%2%2%4%1%5%3%3% 23%17%17%15%20%16%24%14%21%25%10%19% 24%22%21%29%22%24%23%30%15%21%18%24% 46%41%52%41%52%17%46%44%49%36%66%46% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 4%13%3%4%3%39%4%3%9%5%2%5% 5%4%6%7%3%2%6%6%3%7%3%5% 3%6%5%2%2%2%4%2%4%3%5%3% 23%31%31%22%17%19%24%25%22%46%18%24% 35%12%24%25%32%20%28%29%21%8%32%26% 30%34%32%40%43%17%35%36%42%30%40%36% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1222022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 599 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 8%11%0%1%14%0%3%0%14%4%0%0%4% 1%10%0%8%0%0%3%5%2%3%0%0%4% 4%2%18%0%6%0%3%2%5%3%19%0%3% 21%22%7%19%4%3%22%15%31%10%16%40%19% 16%27%67%25%7%19%22%27%30%29%19%30%24% 51%29%8%47%69%78%47%51%18%51%46%30%46% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 8%14%0%2%14%0%3%5%0%3%0%0%5% 4%8%0%7%1%0%6%5%2%6%0%0%5% 2%3%18%0%6%0%5%5%19%2%0%0%3% 24%26%7%24%9%55%32%15%19%17%24%42%24% 14%26%67%32%6%22%22%28%33%37%24%15%26% 49%23%8%34%64%23%31%42%27%35%52%42%36% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1232022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 600 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 2%4%18%2%9%1%4% 2%8%1%6%0%0%4% 5%1%3%2%5%0%3% 23%17%29%20%8%20%19% 23%33%20%19%32%5%24% 45%37%29%51%46%73%46% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 2%7%22%2%5%1%5% 10%5%1%7%0%0%5% 6%3%8%3%2%0%3% 15%16%22%26%36%40%24% 25%37%24%26%15%20%26% 42%32%23%36%42%39%36% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1242022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 601 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 25%6%3%2%4% 2%6%3%6%4% 4%2%3%4%3% 32%17%22%13%19% 15%21%27%20%24% 21%48%42%56%46% 27 86 261 214 607 35%8%3%2%5% 4%10%3%5%5% 12%2%3%3%3% 23%35%27%13%24% 12%18%34%22%26% 15%28%30%55%36% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1252022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 602 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 6%6%7%3%2%4% 2%7%3%2%10%4% 11%4%3%1%1%3% 16%20%18%16%25%19% 12%19%29%29%19%24% 54%44%41%49%43%46% 88 115 95 216 87 607 5%11%9%3%1%5% 4%12%3%2%9%5% 6%7%4%2%2%3% 13%14%37%27%20%24% 22%18%23%31%28%26% 50%39%24%35%40%36% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1262022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 603 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 22%7%2%2%0%4% 5%6%1%0%34%4% 8%7%3%3%4%3% 26%45%27%18%24%19% 6%19%25%19%0%24% 33%16%42%58%38%46% 31 22 85 157 9 607 24%1%2%2%0%5% 6%38%4%1%34%5% 3%18%7%1%11%3% 55%20%39%10%24%24% 5%8%37%29%0%26% 7%14%12%58%31%36% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1272022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 604 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 0%0%0%0%11%10%4% 0%0%3%10%3%8%4% 7%0%6%0%2%3%3% 27%3%11%13%21%5%19% 3%66%18%37%22%20%24% 62%31%63%40%41%53%46% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 0%0%3%1%12%19%5% 0%0%0%8%2%1%5% 7%0%6%1%3%3%3% 17%10%30%23%26%32%24% 8%80%23%29%20%23%26% 67%10%39%37%37%22%36% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1282022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 605 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR TOTAL They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Go vernment overreach Other Nothing/Don' t know Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 2%0%14%6%8%4%4% 7%4%14%13%0%4%4% 3%0%6%0%3%3%3% 9%23%7%62%24%18%19% 14%7%50%9%12%26%24% 65%65%8%9%54%45%46% 53 23 12 13 45 461 607 2%0%17%19%7%5%5% 11%0%3%11%0%5%5% 3%0%6%0%1%4%3% 8%29%62%46%26%24%24% 19%29%3%4%13%29%26% 58%42%8%21%54%33%36% 53 23 12 13 45 461 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1292022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 606 of 810 LPR Benefits - Attitudinals LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total POLICE HAVE LOCATED MISSING PERSONS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= DATA USED TO SOLVE VIOLENT CRIME AND ARREST CRIMINAL SUSPECTS Not at all beneficial Not that beneficial Unsure Somewhat beneficial Very beneficial Extremely beneficial n= 23%3%0%2%0%4% 14%1%0%9%0%4% 3%3%32%2%2%3% 35%17%56%16%13%19% 19%34%7%20%24%24% 6%43%5%50%61%46% 89 83 15 128 290 607 30%0%0%2%0%5% 21%1%0%8%0%5% 5%6%37%4%1%3% 38%34%3%38%11%24% 3%36%60%18%32%26% 3%23%0%31%56%36% 89 83 15 128 290 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1302022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 607 of 810 LPR Concerns - Demographics GENDER AGE TOTAL Female Male 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 17%24%18%10%25%22%15%31%20% 19%15%10%23%10%24%17%15%17% 1%4%0%0%1%1%9%6%3% 35%19%28%28%34%17%40%18%27% 15%16%18%15%12%22%8%18%15% 12%23%26%24%18%14%10%13%17% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 24%31%18%11%33%35%28%35%27% 21%15%20%17%14%23%19%17%18% 1%2%0%0%2%0%7%1%2% 18%18%8%12%24%17%28%16%18% 15%13%10%16%10%16%10%18%14% 21%22%44%42%17%9%9%12%21% 281 326 11 46 92 135 143 180 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1312022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 608 of 810 LPR Concerns - Demographics ETHNICITY LANGUAGE TOTAL White/Cauca sian Hispanic/Lati no Black/Africa n American Asian/Pacific Islander Multi-ethnic English Spanish Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 31%20%15%13%12%19%25%20% 17%13%9%19%42%17%16%17% 1%4%0%0%1%1%10%3% 18%31%14%41%13%27%27%27% 12%16%28%19%6%16%15%15% 20%16%33%8%26%20%7%17% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 37%25%20%27%23%26%33%27% 17%15%16%28%27%19%14%18% 1%1%0%2%5%2%3%2% 16%20%12%15%13%15%30%18% 13%16%6%13%7%13%19%14% 15%23%47%15%25%25%3%21% 240 223 23 55 46 574 30 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1322022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 609 of 810 LPR Concerns - Demographics INCOME VOTER REGISTRATION TOTAL < $25,000 $25 to 40,000 $40 to 60,000 $60 to 80,000 $80 to 100,000 $100,000 to $150,000 > $150,000 Non-Voter Voter Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 38%17%10%31%18%22%19%14%22%20% 22%11%25%11%13%16%20%18%17%17% 0%0%5%4%0%0%5%4%2%3% 12%30%29%33%26%34%26%25%28%27% 26%19%15%6%28%13%8%22%14%15% 2%22%16%16%16%15%22%18%17%17% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 40%30%18%29%27%24%29%16%30%27% 20%8%20%17%21%18%20%28%15%18% 0%2%3%5%1%1%1%1%2%2% 32%17%24%12%12%23%16%14%19%18% 6%32%6%13%17%12%12%21%11%14% 2%12%28%24%23%21%23%19%22%21% 28 48 65 71 91 132 116 102 505 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1332022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 610 of 810 LPR Concerns - Demographics AREA ZIP CODE TOTAL Northwest North Central East Southwest South Central 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 21%17%26%23%14%7%22%20%15%18%29%20% 18%15%12%17%26%14%16%17%23%8%16%17% 1%4%1%3%4%2%1%2%8%1%1%3% 24%23%29%31%24%10%28%27%25%34%30%27% 16%12%22%11%22%3%15%13%20%26%15%15% 20%29%10%15%10%63%17%21%10%14%8%17% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 29%28%37%27%16%21%33%23%15%31%42%27% 18%9%11%16%41%8%16%19%28%7%15%18% 1%3%0%3%1%0%1%3%3%0%0%2% 21%13%13%17%19%5%21%16%24%16%9%18% 15%19%10%14%10%9%15%14%15%20%3%14% 16%26%29%23%14%57%13%26%16%25%31%21% 178 102 84 143 74 19 215 191 90 35 57 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1342022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 611 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN FEDERAL GOV CONFIDENTIALITY COFIDENCE IN ONLINE BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 19%9%8%23%58%36%16%32%16%14%5%19%20% 9%17%15%24%5%3%14%14%21%24%16%42%17% 0%4%77%3%1%0%0%7%5%1%0%0%3% 31%29%0%36%8%3%23%21%37%32%61%0%27% 8%18%0%7%21%0%28%10%22%11%13%18%15% 33%23%0%6%6%58%20%16%0%19%5%22%17% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 41%16%8%27%48%33%24%35%22%20%40%2%27% 14%26%7%18%22%8%14%15%23%23%2%42%18% 0%2%77%0%0%0%1%2%7%2%0%0%2% 9%8%7%28%7%0%16%22%24%28%31%2%18% 12%15%0%10%18%0%19%11%10%7%10%37%14% 25%34%0%16%5%58%25%16%14%19%17%17%21% 73 69 6 87 36 10 126 72 20 79 16 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1352022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 612 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals CONFIDENCE IN CHULA VISTA CONFIDENTIALITY TOTAL Not at all confident Not that confident Unsure Somewhat confident Very confident Extremely confident Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 21%15%14%20%31%20%20% 12%13%16%22%10%26%17% 0%4%10%2%0%1%3% 26%38%25%26%24%7%27% 18%16%11%11%28%7%15% 22%14%22%18%6%38%17% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 35%22%22%31%29%13%27% 14%26%16%17%8%29%18% 1%2%10%1%1%0%2% 18%26%3%16%24%8%18% 22%10%9%11%16%22%14% 12%14%40%24%22%29%21% 96 126 39 237 79 28 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1362022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 613 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals TRUST IN POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES TOTAL Not at all Not much Somewhat A lot Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 9%6%17%38%20% 12%15%15%23%17% 2%4%3%1%3% 24%34%29%21%27% 6%17%22%6%15% 47%24%15%11%17% 27 86 261 214 607 15%17%24%42%27% 6%14%16%25%18% 0%0%2%2%2% 7%11%24%15%18% 13%22%14%5%14% 59%35%19%11%21% 27 86 261 214 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1372022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 614 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals CIVIC MOOD TOTAL Wrong Track, Strongly Wrong Track, Somewhat Mixed/Unsur e Right Direction, Somewhat Right Direction, Strongly Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 23%25%15%16%29%20% 14%15%13%14%34%17% 2%6%3%0%5%3% 23%14%33%40%7%27% 13%22%14%18%6%15% 25%19%21%13%19%17% 88 115 95 216 87 607 45%33%30%17%29%27% 9%23%11%18%30%18% 2%1%2%1%4%2% 15%14%14%26%11%18% 11%19%12%14%11%14% 17%11%32%25%14%21% 88 115 95 216 87 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1382022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 615 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CAMERAS TOTAL Disapprove, strongly Disapprove, somewhat Approve, somewhat Approve, strongly Unsure Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%3%9%37%7%20% 4%9%12%25%26%17% 2%0%0%0%30%3% 8%23%37%21%4%27% 27%55%25%7%10%15% 57%10%17%9%24%17% 31 22 85 157 9 607 11%7%12%45%53%27% 7%6%15%18%29%18% 0%6%2%0%4%2% 6%6%23%22%8%18% 22%56%23%5%5%14% 55%18%25%9%0%21% 31 22 85 157 9 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1392022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 616 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals IMPORTANCE OF NEW PRIVACY PROTECTION POLICY TOTAL Not at all important Not very important Somewhat important Very important Extremely important Unsure Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 3%37%16%22%14%15%20% 0%17%25%14%19%2%17% 0%0%3%5%3%5%3% 79%44%33%34%21%19%27% 4%3%9%15%19%1%15% 13%0%14%10%24%57%17% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 8%37%43%24%17%20%27% 0%17%16%26%23%4%18% 0%0%2%1%5%2%2% 72%3%6%20%15%16%18% 7%44%5%16%6%12%14% 13%0%29%13%35%47%21% 7 9 65 114 89 19 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1402022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 617 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals WHAT SEEN/READ/HEARD RE CHULA VISTA LPR TOTAL They're being used Read/Seen news stories Information shared w/other agencies Privacy concerns/Go vernment overreach Other Nothing/Don' t know Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 31%13%4%6%15%21%20% 32%29%8%6%27%15%17% 0%0%0%0%2%3%3% 11%38%0%9%28%29%27% 8%10%51%18%9%16%15% 18%10%38%61%19%16%17% 53 23 12 13 45 461 607 32%25%6%11%46%26%27% 29%17%3%0%10%19%18% 0%0%0%0%1%2%2% 15%16%0%13%7%20%18% 8%5%44%24%5%14%14% 15%38%48%53%31%19%21% 53 23 12 13 45 461 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1412022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 618 of 810 LPR Concerns - Attitudinals LPR APPROVAL MOVEMENT TOTAL Stay disapprove Move disapprove Stay unsure Move approve Stay approve Total ONE OF 2000 PLATE READINGS PROVIDES REAL-TIME MATCH TO SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= INFORMATION WILL BE SHARED WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES Not at all concerned Not that concerned Unsure Somewhat concerned Very concerned Extremely concerned n= 0%5%8%19%33%20% 2%9%0%15%27%17% 3%4%15%1%3%3% 13%41%56%19%30%27% 32%21%14%23%5%15% 51%20%7%24%3%17% 89 83 15 128 290 607 7%16%29%23%39%27% 6%10%0%16%27%18% 0%0%16%4%1%2% 8%23%49%21%17%18% 32%14%6%17%6%14% 48%37%0%20%9%21% 89 83 15 128 290 607 Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. 1620 5th Avenue, Suite 825, San Diego, CA 92101 Page 1422022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 619 of 810 Appendix A Page 1 Q8. What have you seen, read, or heard, if anything, about the city of Chula Vista’s use of drones for law enforcement purposes? *Percentages reflect weighting procedure HEARD POLICE USE DRONES (12.7%) A little (2) Have been following the program, aware of the tools Heard a little bit Heard about it on the news Heard about it years ago they were going start using drones that's all I’ve heard Heard of the drones Heard that they use some drones I am aware I am aware of the system of drones; approve; how to supervise other communities; use all tools to make out city safe I am aware that they're using drones I know they're using them for tracking hard to reach places otherwise, I don't know what else they're being used for and have forgotten wha t else they're being used for I am for the drone protection; I wish I have heard more about drones; I am for all drone protection to defeat crime I have been following somewhat wish we had more coverage near the east of cv I have briefly heard but not much I have heard a bit about it I have heard about it I have heard about it from my neighbors I have heard about the program I have heard of it somewhere but not in Chula Vista I have heard of it; I don’t agree with it I have heard something I have heard that there are drones that go over shopping centers and Palomar I have heard very little I have seen, read and heard that they use drones for law enforcement purposes and agree completely that they should use that technology I have studied their use of drones I heard from neighbor police are using drones I heard it I just heard that they use them I just understand that they are used by law enforcement I know that they do use drones and I’m fine with it I know they are being used doesn't bother me much I know they use them, but I don’t know much about it 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 620 of 810 Appendix A Page 2 I learned about the drones when I attended a public meeting on cameras attached to police cars to capture license plate ids, I think we need lots of them flying in the air I only know that drones are used I read that CVPD has drones being used I'm not very familiar with the use of drones in law enforcement work I know they are being used but not specifics I've heard I don't like the idea; I don't trust the city to do what's right I've heard they do use it but very limited I've heard they have them in use I've read and heard about the use of drones by CVPD I've spoken with officer's during their training and was pleased with what they are doing I’m aware and approve I’m sure they use drones I have not heard of any controversies I’ve heard that the police department has a drone program and deploy drones to emergencies as they can maneuver to the location quicker than a car It is in current use Just read lots of use Just that they are doing it Just that they are used for law enforcement- not much Just that they do Just that they’re doing it Just the fact that the police agency is using drones Just word of mouth, only heard of its presence Know about, read updates and expanded use Limited info Little Only heard that the program exists Only that they started the program Some Some news Somewhat That they are being used That they are testing the drones and might start using them That they have the drones and that they are available for certain situations That they have used it in the westside of cv That they’re using them I can’t see how effective they are they would know better than I do how to use them for police work They are used I approve They told me and I heard on the news They use them They were planning to use them or that they tested them Used for police services Very little (3) Yep Yes (14) Yes, I am aware they use them 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 621 of 810 Appendix A Page 3 Yes, I’ve read about it Yes, police department using them Yup PERSONAL EXPERIENCE/SEEN THE DRONES FLYING (9.1 %) Actually, I have seen them flying above my house Actually, seen one or two of the drones, heard about on the news Am aware they exist have seen one up close Firsthand they are pretty good I have a law enforcement background I feel good about it Got eight cars; flying around all the time; watch me weed my grass Have seen drones in my neighborhood Have seen it flying over my house Have seen them (2) Have seen them go past my house I actually see them flying around my house I have a very negative impression of the drones I believe I have seen the drones flying towards my house to houses not far from me I can hear drones in our area and believe they are very useful they can be deployed quickly for detection and the information is rapidly available I hate those drones flying over my house I have not heard of it, but I have seen drones flying over my house and I don’t like it I have not read anything, but I know they use it because it comes past my home I have noticed the drones being used I have seen a drone, and someone told me I have seen drones flying in person I have seen them (2) I have seen them all around I have seen them fly on top of my house I have seen them go over my house and if they use the info appropriately its fine I have seen them in action and read that they are very effective in surveillance I haven’t heard anything, but I see the drones all the time I don’t like it I know they have them, I know they use them I’ve seen one I read about it; a year ago I read that Japanese police force were working together with Chula Vista police department using drones; I have seen a drone I saw a drone being used in a Bonita neighborhood about two years ago when someone was holding someone hostage with a gun I see a drone above my house people are doing drugs around the corner; and I approve of them I see them flying over ahead at my house; I didn’t feel all that comfortable at first; I realized that is kind of the way things are going; seems like there cannot be done much about it I see them over my house I was unaware but I have seen drones unsure of their origin I've seen it at work I think it's a wonderful tool I've seen police drones and I’m for it I've seen them flying I've seen them flying around but I don't really know what they do I’ve been privy to them working live, and the locations of each launch site as well as the purpose 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 622 of 810 Appendix A Page 4 I’ve been told to watch out for them I have seen them flying above my house I’ve seen a demonstration I’ve seen drones from downtown come over my house I’ve seen drones going over our building but I’m not sure what they are for I’ve seen drones on roof of pd I’ve seen drones patrolling I’ve seen it being used I’ve seen it in action I’ve seen that they’re using them I’ve seen the drones I’ve seen the drones flying but have not read or heard anything about them I’ve seen the drones myself I’ve seen the drones over my house I’ve seen them I’ve seen them around and heard that the police were utilizing them, and they were flying over my house I’ve seen them but have not heard much I’ve seen them I don’t know a lot about the use of them or exactly what they have assisted in, but I can imagine they are useful in many situations I’ve seen them on a crime scene Just about drones flying overhead official drones not peoples drones Just next-door postings how they see the drones flying around Know they are used in domestic violence calls had one show up to our house due to a violent incident with my son during covid shut down One was flying near my window Only reason I know they were using drones they were on my father’s land Presentations, demos, live in use See them all over the place, actually they are everywhere Seem them Seems smart Seen Seen drones buzzing around to and from cv police HQ Seen drones fly over condominium complex Seen them and read about them Seen them personally They fly around randomly Toured the police department and saw how it works Yes, and they fly over our housing and parking, and we hate it and think they should be banned Yes, I have seen the drones Yes, I’ve seen them Yes, the drone arrives first to calls, I have seen it 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 623 of 810 Appendix A Page 5 PRIVACY/SURVEILLANCE CONCERNS (6.3 %) Can be used depending on what political party is in control at that time to enforce their influence very dangerous way to eliminate nonparty individuals do not go allow this to happen so many ways to manipulating this technology Danger to freedom Do not want surveillance like that at all Drones are patrolling without our permission Drones should not be used to serval citizens we have a right to privacy and freedo m from harassment more effort should be made in preventative measures and providing mental health services those who are in need in order to reduce the metal crime as oppo Falls under the same category as the license plate program - I’m sure use of drones is well intentioned, but the potential of misuse outweighs the potential benefits I have and am very concerned that China provides them and could easily hack into the drones I have heard different cities using drones to track and arrest criminals I am not 100% confident in the city’s ability to implement a system which would not violate the privacy of residents using information provided by third parties I have heard that they came from China and possibly the Chinese are observing the officers to know how they react in certain instances I also heard that it was d sad suggested we purchase new ones made in America I have not heard about them is this an invasion of privacy. I have seen drones over my house and neighborhood and knew the camera was on us, super uneasy about guess it’s happened 3 times in the past 6 months but haven’t heard that police are using them, hmm thought it was super creepy and have been looking I have seen drones over my house that have homed in and stayed filming my family in our balcon y I don’t know to whom the drones belong, but they lingered in my family in bathing suits if they are not CVPD then we need to address the problem of drones I know the city regularly uses drones and that access to data gathered is not very well defined and controlled I read once that they were used to invade someone’s privacy I see them fly and hover over my house in a flagrant violation of my privacy I know that the city misrepresented what the drones were for when first acquired I know that the majority o f the drones are made by a Chinese company I think are another tool in the box, and that their use should be strictly controlled to avoid abuse I think it needs to be more regulated; I understand their idea of using it and its used effectively but there is a matter of privacy to be followed; they are getting a committee to start analyzing the drone usage which is good; I would say I don’t total I think it’s some sort of an invasion of privacy I've not heard of this, nor have I seen them this is very creepy and dystopic it might start small now, but I am not looking forward to a future in a decade or two in which police drones patrol our streets we already live in a police state with more pr I’ve heard it will be closely monitored but I have my doubts I don’t feel leadership is to be trusted too much I’ve heard the company that makes them is from China and they are stealing our data If I am aware, and I have seen them, they invade the privacy of the backyards Intrusive 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 624 of 810 Appendix A Page 6 Invasion of my privacy Just concerns about them trailing other people’s areas apartments, homes, properties even if there is investigation, they have to prove they have a substantial amount of evidence for that investigation No but I hope they don't I don't think drones should be used anywhere an d should not be allowed to have cameras I’ve seen neighborhood stories of people being spied on with them Not much but it sounds again like mass surveillance by our government, and I am not in favor of this control Privacy and appears to be used in a random fashion i.e., surveying house parties during the day Privacy issues Question is does it infringe on privacy rights Read some citizens are concerned about privacy The program exists, and is controversial to some considering it may be the precursor to ushering in a “police state” They are using the drones to spy on people They have been used successfully, and have promise if they are appropriately used with privacy protections To what extent? There’s more of a probability it will be misused than not READ/SEEN NEWS STORIES (4.7 %) A couple news articles about their use Have read about it in the San Diego tribune I have heard tv articles about the use of Chula Vista police using drones read the newspaper about the use of drones used in Chula Vista I have seen their drones flown I have read about it in papers and the news, and I think it is a good thing I have read articles & heard at least one report on NPR one reported item was the sharing of information with other law enforcement agenc ies I have read articles and seen on the news that drones are being used to get to place faster than police cars I have read several articles on the subject I have seen some news stories I heard they are using drones and I have seen it on the news, but the y should only be used for violent crimes not for traffic or nonviolent crimes to make money for the city I only heard a story or 2 on the media on the subject they were using drones where they had a suspect inside a structure, and they used for situational awareness of the situation the person was in I read articles and seen you tube videos I read it, but haven’t seen them so not sure if that’s a thing or not I saw it on television there was a news report that it would be used for 1st responders and 911 cal ls I was told by a police officer the same that I had read already: that drones have been used to give an idea of what sort of emergencies services may be most necessary I’ve been to a presentation, and I read about it in the paper I’ve read everything about the scanners and drones and Motorola and everything I’ve seen news stories and I have talked to police officers and supervisors about the use of drones 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 625 of 810 Appendix A Page 7 I’ve seen on the news; instead of using expensive helicopters they’re using drones that are a lot cheaper and easier to maintain and can get into smaller spacers that helicopters can’t On local news reports about how the drone program isn't as transparent as it should be On the radio Only what I see on next door neighbor app Read articles in paper Read it in the news Read online news when the city first announced the drone program Saw a couple minutes of it on the news Seen on tv Seen reports on the news Short articles in local news Social media Tv news reports Yes, from social media, local news channels Yes, I’ve seen news articles about both the use of drones, as well questioning the manufacturing of the drones and whether or not the data is safe I AGREE WITH THE PROGRAM (2.6%) Agree strongly Fine with me Good Good idea I like it I believe a drone can save lives in dangerous situations they are an extra set of eyes for law enforcement and a great source of documentation I support the initiative within law enforcement bounds I think it helps to deter crime I am all for it I think it’s a good idea they can get to a scene of an accident faster than a patrol car I think it’s a great idea I think it’s quite fascinating I’m excited to see how it has for the future I think reinforcements are great as long as we act upon them I think they are necessary, but we need a lot more than drones I’m for it …100% I’m okay with it It seems to me a good option of tactics in its development in the police department, that kind of a good use without abusing, of the system thanks That's very good idea HELPS F IND MISSING PERSONS/CRIMINALS (2.6%) City uses drones in criminal investigations, finding perpetrators Have heard from news, it helps find missing people I have heard that when they are looking for people on foot, they will use them I heard that they use them to enhance the lack of officers to search canyons if there's suspects check areas before sending officers I heard that they’ve been successful on providing first aid to people in need 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 626 of 810 Appendix A Page 8 I heard you monitor people movement through drones I know that drones are flown to track suspects, follow high speed chases, identify homeless encampments I remember reading about it being used for missing persons program That they use them to case people’s houses To help catch criminals, approve CRIME SCENE MONITORING/SURVEILLANCE (1.8 %) Drones being used to surveil crimes being committed within city of Chula Vista I think is a great option to send the drones first to overview the areas I have experience seeing them great equipment I've heard that drones are used for traffic problems, to keep an eye on gang or mob gatherings, etc. Instead of car chases the used of drones yes for criminal activities yes nothing else It’s an instrument to surveillance That they have been able to deploy quickly to crime scenes an d give info to police officers before they can arrive and without placing them in danger They have been putting drones to monitor security, it seems good to me Used for surveillance in yards and green spaces Used to survey the community Yes, for line of sight and, I believe, they may have authority for longer distances have not heard much recently Yes, it to see the view above the area where safe to go to find THE FIRST CITY TO USE THEM (1.6 %) 1st in the nation, use to determine severity of situation before sending in personnel, have witnessed drones in use personally I heard the city of Chula Vista was approved for a pilot program to use drones for law enforcement purposes, primarily in the area around city hall I know it is the first one approved in the country I believe although this program is useful, it can also be intrusive That Chula Vista is one of the regional and state leaders with their drone program That is cutting edge That they are a leader in this technology We have more drones than any other city in America all because we are close to the border Were the number one place in the nation who does it Years ago, I learned that CVPD was one of only a few departments around the country to have been selected and funded to fly drones in a pilot/study program I regularly see large, black drones flying regular routes which I suspect must be CVPD drones Yes, that we are one of the first cities in the nation to use it 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 627 of 810 Appendix A Page 9 POLICE/PUBLIC SAFETY (1.0%) I know they are used and are of benefit in my opinion makes it safer for everyone It helps scout out situations before law enforcement arrives to give accurate information on the scene in real time It would be beneficial to the safety of the people Just that it helps keep officers and the public safe Supporting department That the drones are there; they search area, and they can have info and possible dangers to police officers early; benefits police have a safer environment Use of drones is a very efficient way to respond to many critical incidents without jeopardizing the safety of its officers Well, it's more security for all of us. OTHER (3.2 %) Are being used to assist Drone first responder program Drone program increases police response times Extra level of law enforcement Faster response than officers on the ground so better information is provided to responding officers and it offers a perspective that officers on the ground don’t have from fleeing suspects First response to certain calls good idea Good use of technology Had there been more information provided it would've been better to received Heard that they need to change a lot of things I have heard that they are positioned in several launch areas around the city and that they are only coming or going from a call I’ve heard that they don’t “patrol” looking for violations, which I would be against I think the controversy with DJI drones has been overstated I’ve heard that the drones for the police are used for traffic reviewing instead of a helicopter If instead of using a ghetto bird or a beautiful German shepherd to do the dirty work, you’ll use the drone that’s fine If you are not breaking a law don’t worry Important It is good that they are using them for solving crimes It's consistent with other law enforcement agencies across the state, trying to maximize resources It’s a cheaper way to police you cut corners by not offering a competitive police officer wage by using drones It’s a good way to fight crime Last heard was experimental Little My dad lives in a rural area, and they use drones out there close to the border I know they are developing war drones which are kind of scary Okay Only targets west side of city Only that they are used for specific reasons 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 628 of 810 Appendix A Page 10 That they can use the drones to keep an eye of a vehicle that they are trying to investigate That they have a cutting-edge drone program that cuts down on response times to calls That they’re a lot less expensive than a helicopter NOTHING/DON’T KNOW (54.5 %) Have heard nothing Have not heard Have not heard how it's used Have not heard/read anything Have not read, heard or seen the use of drones by the city Have not seen any drone around my area so I am not aware of it Haven't heard Haven't heard anything Haven't heard anything but nothing wrong with it Haven't read anything about such topic Haven’t Haven’t heard (2) Haven’t heard about it Haven’t heard anything Haven’t seen or heard about the drones being used Heard nothing Heard nothing about it Hello I don’t have information I don’t know I have heard nothing I have not heard (2) I have not heard anything (2) I have not heard anything about it I have not heard anything about police drones I have not heard anything about this I have no idea I have not heard of this, but I hate the idea of drones I have not heard, but it can be a double-edged sword for criminals who take the opportunity to commit crime I have not seen red or heard anything about the city of Chula Vista using drones for law - enforcement and I wouldn’t have a problem with it if they did or if I heard about it I haven't found out about that I haven't heard anything about drones I haven't seen any drones I haven’t heard anything yet I haven’t heard much on the subject I haven’t heard of anything yet I haven’t heard too much; heard it is in place I haven’t really heard anything about them I believe I have seen one here or there 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 629 of 810 Appendix A Page 11 I’ve heard nothing at all if residents aren’t sent information in the mail or advertisements aren’t made on the news, then many people would not hear I only listen to the news in the morn ing before work and for an hour when I get home If is going to help to solve a case I’m ok N/A (8) Never heard Never heard anything Never heard of it No (22) No comment (2) No nothing No, I haven’t heard of it No, I’ve never heard they are using it if they use it for chase then I would accept that None (14) None that I know of None this mayor does not share any info with residents None, but would like to understand the parameters of use and how I’m protected my concern is that they’ll be able to view all aspects of my home, which in some cases can be abused not always, but lack of trust in the law enforcement with recent situ Not a lot, so don’t have an opinion yet Not at all (3) Not aware Not aware drones are being used Not familiar Not heard (2) Not heard anything Not much (6) Not much at all Not much don't care Not much send me proposals thanks Not too much about that Nothing (161 Nothing at all nothing but sounds good Nothing seen or heard Nothing Sorry haven’t heard anything The only thing I remember a couple of years is that drones could be flown outside the eyesight of the operator Unaware Unfamiliar about the use of drones Wasn’t aware of the drones! Well depends on if they are using drones to catch criminals killers murderers and rapists, I’m all for it if they trying to catch somebody speeding then I’m not for it 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 630 of 810 Appendix B Page 1 Q10. What is the main reason you approve/disapprove of the program? *Percentages reflect weighting procedure REASONS TO APPROVE (N=477) POLICE/PUBLIC SAFETY (2 0.2 %) A life safety issue for police officers involved A safe response to a crime in progress to give real time information to responding units Above all things, more protection in the family, where we live, today there is too much, crime and catalyst theft and gasoline in cars thanks Aerial support would assist officers and reduce dangerous situations for them and the public Allows law enforcement to get a view of a scene without putting personnel in danger, allows for a fast response time Anything we can do to keep the general public safe is important Because I live downtown where there are bars and drunk people and would be great Because if this is going to help solve crimes or find bad guys, it is important for our safety Because if we have that I feel more relaxed because our house just had burglary if anything like that it helps and can catch the people Because it can better the community to make it safer Because it doesn’t put people’s lives in danger because it’s a drone and they’re monitoring people that are probably doing something that they shouldn’t be doing, and I want them caught Because they can probably keep us safer Because we have too much crime, we need to have all we can for security Benefit of our security Better protection for our citizens against crime; I have already seen it on the news Better security Community safety Crime scene can be exposed while keeping our officers informed & safe For its potential to gather real time info without endangering officers and its potential to provide info that would avoid quick police escalation For officers safety and victim safety For our security For safety I believe they provide a safer environment for Chula vista For safety of the people For security For the safety of the citizens For their safety first and the rest of us as well Government needs to be in charge, protect us! Greater control and security I agree with using technology to make the city safer I believe it keeps the safety without risking police lives 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 631 of 810 Appendix B Page 2 I expect it will make me safer I think it can be helpful so they know what the situation is, and they can more s afely deal with whatever it is; I’ve seen examples shown where they were very helpful I think it could help safety of the traffic I think it enhances the safety for the citizens of Chula vista I think it helps get out of harm’s way of crime scenes I think it makes us safer I would think it would keep crime down plus help finding elderly people If it is useful to keep the community safe and to find and detect criminals, I am ok with it If there’s visibility and transparency making accessible to the public fo r the greater good If they use a drone, they don’t have to send an officer and be put at risk In many cases law enforcement cannot get close enough via fire; via missing; person; drones are best tools to investigate; provide safety for others Increase public safety Increased capability for safe law enforcement however, there are privacy issues Increased security is important, but I think they should be used only for public events It can give valuable information and be safety feature without criminal seeing It enhances safety It helps for safety purposes It helps keep us safe; you can see more from the sky than you can from the ground It increases public and the safety of police officers It is to protect us and them It keeps people safe It makes me feel secure - that if there is a problem, there is another tool to help solve it It may help keep the police officers safe It provides safety for the officers it makes best use for their resources I will make solving crimes faster and easier best use of new technology It will enable the police to have a better view of criminals and help keep our police and law -abiding citizens safe It's safer for personnel and assist in high-risk situations It’s good for the city it helps police It’s less dangerous to patrol with a drone Keep us safe Keeping neighbors safe Keeping the fine city of Chula vista in check Keeping up with technology to assure officers are safe and they save money by effectively using manpower resources Keeps citizens safer Keeps officers safe More police eyes make things safer More safety for officers Office safety, enhanced situational awareness Officer safety One feels more secure in the area People will feel confident for the security and protection 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 632 of 810 Appendix B Page 3 Police are in a war with crime; they have to have an edge and there is always a possibility someone will exceed or misuse power; they need to protect themselves and protect citizen Police need all the advantages they can get to keep the community safe Primarily it's an officer safety tool Protecting lives of personnel Provides police with added visibility to be safer presumably Public and officer safety, cost effectiveness, visual record Public safety (7) Public safety and safe neighborhood Public safety and to better see what is happening in the situation Public safety legitimate surveillance Safety (10) Safety for the officers and people on the ground and helps to find problems with less manpower and force Safety making things flow faster so games won’t be played amongst people because there will be proof; the drones can help out with a lot of accident victims and issues like that it will keep our roads safer Safety purposes I have nothing to hide so I don’t mind them Safety, efficiency Safety; I think it’s used to provide a safety net for their o fficers and the people they’re responding to, and I think it’s a good idea to have an extra pair of eyes out there Safety; let’s say they're chasing a suspected criminal that tried to hide and run away from them - they can track them like that Security (4) See what is going on in a safe way The drones are for the safety of the police and hopefully others To ensure the safety of all involved, including police officers to help apprehend suspects and the ability to record from above To keep officers safe and to not risk lives or safety To keep the community and the officers that protect us safe To protect the citizens more than they’re doing Use all the tech you can to enhance safety, the bad guys are doing the same in the opposite direction Will be safer for police Will keep our neighborhoods more safe give access for police to investigate crimes You get less people involve and they can see everything without getting hurt CRIME SCENE MONITORING/SURVEILLANCE (19.5%) A recording of an air view can provide important information Able to observe from a birds eye view Allows cops to survey a situation instead of guns a blazing Always police to view areas that may be difficult to see on foot An efficient way of getting a different view of a scene; minimizes cost of helicopters 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 633 of 810 Appendix B Page 4 As a previous said drones are very effective way to get visuals and why range throughout the city and if used properly it could save a lot of people Because it assists in pre analyzing crime scenes prior to arrival Because of my experience of the people around the corner who are known to do drugs; need to catch them in the act; monitors their activity Better view of actual and factual evidence of the scene or crime Birds eye view of everything when crime and such a down fall of many neighborhoods on Chula Vista have gone down and ugly Concerns of illegal activities that should be watched and potential abuse of overused Correct reporting Cover a larger area Criminal activity can be monitored and documented Criminal surveillance Documenting crimes and having evidence Drones can be used as human eyes and ears to evaluate situations before putting officers in the mix the more info they have in possibly dangerous situations, the less likely the situation will escalate Eyes in a potentially dangerous situation, to protect the lives of officers and other innocents Eyes on the ground from the sky can more easily see what’s needed For police to be able to have eyes over a crime scene; an aerial visual of the area Gives different perspective not able to see, look back on it later Gives our city better coverage Having a recording of an incident is beneficial for everyone Helps cover a bigger area, from the sky also I see that police can get a better idea of the problem and create a better strategy I approve because maybe they can catch people when they are running through yards I approve of the police department using drones to get a better visual of where a crime has been committed because then they can see the full spectrum from above and perhaps that will lead to information as to what really happened and perhaps who did I believe that it is helpful to be able to look at a whole crime scene from a farther perspective than just up close I feel like it can be beneficial in terms of giving law enforcement and fire fighter personnel a better idea of the environment they’re going into I feel that it could get a better perspective and it would be more neutral if they did that I think it can get a better way of the incident before the police get there so they know what is happening I think it could potentially mean less people are at the scene causing a distraction to drivers and maybe keep more lanes open causing less of a traffic jam I think the drone program allows the pd to get a better visual on potential crime scenes, and that better understanding and visibility helps protect those involved in the situation, the responding officers and the public at large I think they can check everything better I think they will be able to observe what is going on in the city; that way they see something with the drones they can look into; it can be a crime If above incident If locating a suspect and to be aware of crime taking place 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 634 of 810 Appendix B Page 5 If you are using it for the purpose of monitoring certain situations and not for keeping surveillance of people, then it is beneficial not only to police but also for the people who is affected; it’s useful as a watch dog because it is being recorded; a Improves situational awareness of the police It allows officers to visualize what’s going on beyond their line of sight It gets eyes on stuff it gets eyes on somewhere that people can’t see It gives arriving officers a good description of what they are walking in to It helps to use drones to see wat we normally can’t see I support use of it for occurring crime and instances but not for random fly-bys in neighborhoods It provides a real time picture of what’s going on the ground to supervisors to ensure officer safety and public safety It provides data that can be utilized to determine the cause of an incident that might not be visible from ground level it provides a different view It will aid the police with a timely and up to date situation in a given place and time It’s a good way to see things It’s being used appropriately to scope out situations that might cause police problems Its needed for crimes that are committed so they have evidence on camera Just in case there are places that are inaccessible Live coverage Maybe can catch people doing bad things Officers need to know what they are getting into Officers will be able to see in 3d vice 2d, i.e. birds eye view from above plus ground level Only if it's video of an incident not watching all people who are minding their own business it’s good to get all the facts of a situation the drone could get more detail Provides live video surveillance, speeds response in the correct area, enhances searches, provides quicker response and identifies where criminal or criminal activity is Provides more accurate info Real time Real time accurate video Real time preservation and surveying Real time surveillance can catch criminals more quickly Reduced cost of patrolling, massively increased coverage of patrolling, reduced risk to live officers, increased effectiveness and safer deployment of live officers Situation awareness So, police are able to see situation prior to entry onto scene so they won’t have to use deadly force as often So, they can catch and see what they need to see faster So, they can see more when the crime is happening Sometimes police on ground are not able to get all information Stealth tracking That it keeps track of the city; and that they should do whatever they need to monitor it, or keep an eye on emergencies They can appraise the situation without putting anyone in danger They have a birds eye view to find someone and its very helpful They’re able to see what’s going on without being there in the middle of the incident and there’s more coverage then 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 635 of 810 Appendix B Page 6 To video actual police activities To view what’s going on in an area and fix it Visually captures events Well, it keeps more eyes on the neighborhood You can get a view of what is going on when a crime is being committed from a birds eye view from the air so you’ll see things that you wouldn’t normally see You could see the location incident occur before officers get there AID POLICE INVESTIGATION (1 8.1%) A good use of science to help with things that need to be done Accuracy in the reality Again, any tool that can be used to catch and prosecute criminals is a good thing Allows the pd to size up the incident before officers arrive also allowed for finding lost people in the neighborhood An excellent way for police to conduct their business more effectively Anything that helps law enforcement get real time assessments of situations is ju st great policing more information means better understanding and appropriate effective response keeps everyone safe Because the more you know about an incident the more you likely you can solve the problem Because they are trying to help us; it is going to help police investigate if there is a problem Crime Crime investigation and prevention Efficacy and well use of its resources quick feedback to the police officers Evidence against someone For ongoing criminal investigations, it gives important informati on but, I don’t like that they would just fly over anywhere to see if a crime might be committed Gives investigators more data, gives immediate visuals on incidents, may be a deterrent if bad actors aware of the device or that such a device may be deployed Giving the police more real time data allows them to better assess a situation Help actual crimes Help fight crime (2) Help solve the case faster Helpful Helping solving crimes Helps law enforcement Helps police Helps stop crime Helps with diagnostics and assessment of the problem at hand versus 20 bystanders with cellphones Helps with law enforcement I am for anything that is going to help I approve because nobody’s perfect and if there’s an accident something could be missed that when they go back and look at the film, they could spot it I just think that adds to the help that a police officer could have missed something 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 636 of 810 Appendix B Page 7 I do not want anyone not guilty if something being accused of doing something illegal on the other hand, I don’t want someone guilty getting away with committing a crimes I think anything that helps the police, or fire department find the guilty per I feel it helps police officers do their job I feel like if it is used to help solve crimes especially violent crimes; it is in the best interest of the public I guess if it helps with investigations or catching criminals, I’m all for it I just believe that it will help find some crime I like the efficiency behind it as well as the real time information its able to provide to the public and police officers I think it can be useful to enforce laws and help police in their activities I think it could be added information in handling the situation I think it gives more information I think it helps for information gathering I think it would be helpful they wouldn’t have to send a live person they could still get valuable evidence while investigating a crime I’d of criminal behavior I’ve been in military drone program I know what they are capable of, if the police use it to id criminal activity, then why not If I’m not doing, I say go for it get the bad guys If it helps in finding what they are looking for it will be beneficial If it helps with crime If it helps, I support it If it helps, then solve a crime scene it’s a good thing If it provides fax and much needed information, then it is a good thing to help solve whatever the issue is If it will help in anyway, I’m all for it If it will help with law enforcement, I’m for it If the drones help the police serve the residents better, then I approve them If they are investigating and that helps why not makes job more efficient If they catch a crime, then that’s good if they don’t misuse the info that they get If they could use it for evidence, they need If used properly, these are tools that can assist in handling the current situation If you are looking for a crime it would be a good help It allows the police to fight crime and get better results for the community It gives extra evidence It helps catch criminals, yet I believe the China drones should not be used American drones should be used, even though cost of new drones would be expensive It helps make their job easier It okay for police to use them for law enforcement purposes; but not to scope peoples yards It’s an enhancing tool for valid law enforcing It’s easier to determine which actions need to be taken It’s law enforcement account of the situation to inform other law enforcement and not just a civilian opinion Law enforcement tools Might make it easier for police to investigate dangerous areas 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 637 of 810 Appendix B Page 8 On one hand it can help control onsite investigations, but not totally confident it won’t be used properly Provide more information Provides police a new tool Real time, active pursuit of real crime So, if there is an incident then law enforcement wou ld have a better understanding of what actually happened Solve the crime Sounds like it could be useful The information is more accurate The main reason would be to aid in solving crimes and accidents They support our police department fire department and first responders This is a crime area it provide the police a picture of the area where they’re going to either go arrest someone that’s committed a major crime or so a person who wants to commit suicide, or someone has kidnapped an individual To catch criminals To find faster any type of vandalism and drug use in areas where there are children To get important information about accident To have more control when there is an incident To try to get criminals of the streets Well, I’m a person who is pro law enforcement, I think it would do a good job and nothing wrong with that, if it helps them to investigate and solve crimes then that’s fine Well, it would help a lot to clarify any incident FIND MISSING PERSONS/CRIMINALS (6.7%) Any help the police can get to catch criminals Because sometimes it might be a little easier to catch suspects Catch the criminals Could help in suspect apprehension Criminal catching Easy to catch criminals For accidents or real time location of at-risk people For use in identifying potential witnesses/participants Get the bad guys Help catch criminals I have an elderly friend of mine that was gone, and we couldn’t find him, and they found him with the drone and probably saved his life I want to catch criminals If anyone can do it the police should be able to If it helps find a person, they are looking for and it’s not intrusive that is positive If someone is running, they can make the drone find them easier to find people If the drones are being used for searching a fugitive or someone leaving a scene of an accident and for all legal purposes If the drones are legitimately being used to locate or witness a crime in progress, then that will be a good reason to use them 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 638 of 810 Appendix B Page 9 If the police are looking for a criminal fleeing the area It could be used to find lost children or abducted children It helps them find people that are lost; whenever someone get lost you can hear the helicopters flying around because they are looking for somebody if they have a drone, they probably can find it faster It will provide better and faster info for the police to catch the bad guys Makes it easier to catch criminals they have too much of an upper hand So, they can find perpetrators So, they can find the people on suspicion of a crime The drones can help cover larger areas and provide detailed descriptions of subjects or if they need to look in areas that are hard to get to and would not possibly be seen by those unaware They can locate criminals To catch bad people and sneaky people and people not being good and or responding to an emergency to keep our city safe To catch criminals To catch law breakers, help keep police from ambush’s To find criminals faster To find to find missing people and finding illegal people in that area the border gate is open we need to watch illegal person To help catch criminals Well, I use drones on call of duty it helps me hunt down the enemies without much effort Will help them find criminals a lot easier Would be able to search a wider area for missing persons HELICOPTER REP LACEMENT (5.5 %) Cheaper than a helicopter First of all, it is much less expensive than helicopters and if you’re not in trouble why should you be concerned Helicopters were used in the past this is cheaper How they use the helicopters they can also use drones instead of going through neighborhoods or schools they can use drones instead I don't see it any different than a helicopter I have strong mixed feelings; I do believe we need; we have helicopters flying over; I see no difference of helicopter; I see no reason drones is not acceptable I think it is much safer than using a helicopter or any other type of vehicles that could be dangerous to a person or police officer; it is more cost effective I think it’s a lot cheaper than putting out a helicopter and its better on the environment If they think it will help, I think it’s a good idea; if it’s really helpful and is used right it could be good; drones are cheaper than helicopters It is not an invasion of my privacy unless the cameras are looking at me or my family at times when privacy is expected, and no lawful reason exists helicopters provide the same capability but at a much greater cost and risk It seems it’s a more cost-effective way to see crimes in progress than helicopters are It's a way of chasing or locating thugs, rather than helicopters, which I’ve seen them use 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 639 of 810 Appendix B Page 10 It's more cost effective than a helicopter and it's air crew as well as being able to extend aerial surveillance It’s cheaper than a helicopter and it doesn’t put pilots at risk It’s cheaper than a helicopter but it is the same thing Less helicopters? More cost effective than putting up a helicopter and appreciate using technology to catch criminals the drone can go where patrol cars cannot More eyes in the sky; there can’t be more helicop ters; they can chase cars and such; area surveillance is good Probably because it does not cost as much to survey that way compared to like a helicopter Quick to deploy and cheaper than helicopters Using helicopters is really high cost which is waste of money drone’s maintenance is really cheap compare with helicopters city has to save money and reduce taxes We have a huge city with a lot of open spaces, these drones are useful instead of helicopters Well, it’s a way for them to quickly assess whatever situation they have Chula vista police department don't have helicopters so that would help them out IMPROVE RESPONSE TIMES (5.4%) Allows law enforcement to quickly and more accurately respond to criminal activity Any additional data can help with emergency response time and solving crimes Because they can respond quickly Can be useful in preventing and responding to crime Efficiency of response time for calls, extra eyes in the sky to track ongoing crime events personal innocent? Then there is no reason to feel privacy is invaded, there is nothing to hide Expedite the process Fast response Faster eyes on incidents Faster response times Faster response to direct assets where needed Faster response to violence Faster security Faster to respond For real time response, to get help needed where it needs to be, to pinpoint location, for secondary surveillance Hope it’s faster response Hopefully it will target criminals faster and police can respond to 911 calls faster I approve of the use in response to an active call I approve of its use in preparation for an operation I do not approve of drones used to patrol without any real destination, in place of an officer in a car Improve police actions Improves police response times It improves response time, help obtain evidence and can save lives It save time for the police to arrive More speed and the use of new technology is important Potentially faster response; covers larger area with fewer people (reduces labor) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 640 of 810 Appendix B Page 11 Quicker response (2) The drones can get to scenes of crime/accidents faster than vehicles and can provide information The drones get there faster, and they are able to see what is happening Time is money in business and I’m sure the same can be applied to first responders, in that time is life USEF UL TOOL/TECHNOLOGY (4.7 %) Another step in improving technology; police better track for what they are looking for Drones are another tool to fight crime Effective and efficient Efficiency and effectiveness Everything is electronic these days so why not use drones for that as well bit of overreach, but I also see some benefits Good tool for solving crime Got to move towards a modern life Hi tech I am for improved technology I believe that it is necessary to use the latest technology for a faster and more effective service to update I guess the technology I guess they use it to see what the situation is without going in there I think it's a valuable tool when properly used I think police need all the tools to get and arrest people that comment crimes I think they do a good job If technology can get things done in a quicker safer manner than why not If technology can help or get the job done why not use if work smarter not harder! It is urgent to use all the technology because the situation is getting worse e very time Its efficient just another tool to help them out on the field Other agencies use the technology already and have benefit greatly Research has demonstrated that drones can be used in a variety of helpful ways we should take advantage of the ways that benefit Chula vista Sounds like a tool that helps them be successful at their job Technology Technology should be used to benefit our society They utilize technology and are using it for good so as long as they say what they are doing it fine Useful resource DETER/REDUCE CRIME (1.8 %) Anything to deter crime city should also do something about people driving recklessly (i.e., too fast, running red lights, racing) and they should also do something about the loud mufflers Because it would be easier to minimize crime, criminals would be aware of the drones Because we don’t have enough actual feet on the ground and the drones are the next best thing; I think it’s a good idea if it deters criminals Because you can avoid crimes like robbery and others, and it might make it more safe Crime prevention Help to stop or solve crime 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 641 of 810 Appendix B Page 12 If it helps in preventing crime, ok It can deter crime if criminals know they can be watched via drone It deters crime Reduce crime through deterrence, stop crime real time Reduces crime The main reason is to lessen criminal activities in the area or something like that to reduce criminal activities ONLY IF USED PROPERLY FOR INCIDENTS/EMERGENCIES (1.8%) As long as technology is used according to proper guidelines and rules, I believe the police can use drones appropriately and safely Emergency situation Excellent tool if not abused For emergency I think our privacy is import but if it helps the police its good then as long as it’s used for the accident I think the drone could be helpful in determining needs in emergencies, I think as long as they are used responsibly and not to entrap people or cause unnecessary privacy issues, they should be used but not flown lowly when directly over houses If it is only used during or after an incident If it’s for an incident I wouldn’t mind but if it’s just flying around monitoring, I don’t approve If it’s for an incident I’m good if it’s just because they think it’s ok, then no If used properly and constitutionally, can be useful for le It could be good if it's handled right, or it could be bad if it's handled wrong Seems to be incident specific Transparency Well because it depends on the situation it for accidents for crimes and something like that, I can approve it ADDITIONAL POLICE MANPOWER (1.5%) Helps with the reduced manpower that the department is facing I think they need all they help they can get It is cheaper than sending an officer and it is faster than an officer Maybe there will be more police presence in our area More eyes in the sky there are only so many police to watch everything drones could be of extreme help! Not enough officers Not enough police on the ground Not enough police to be everywhere Reduces the number of badges necessary and potentially reduces danger to t hem Shortage of police officers, drones can assist in keeping crime rates down There is less police presence in east Chula Vista we need more eyes to deter crime such as car and catalytic converter theft, speeding, package stealing and more We don’t have enough police in east Chula vista this is not the ideal solution but better than nothing 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 642 of 810 Appendix B Page 13 With everything that has happened in the past year like the Black Lives Matter movement and etc. this is assistance to the police because they don’t have enough manpower USED FOR TRAFFIC INCIDENCES (1.5 %) Can used to assist and monitor active crimes, such motor chases or bust or active 911 calls to help the police gather information without putting themselves or citizens at risk not to be used at all times to monitor everyone’s actions Doesn’t disrupt ground traffic High speed chases I support law enforcement people drive recklessly too often I was in an accident recently in Chula vista, on Otay Lakes rd., where I was t -boned by a driver going full speed through a red light, which is extremely common here I don't trust that the engineers are actually watching these cameras I was watching twitter they were trying to catch this bad guy in a high -speed chase, and he hit 4 cars and police couldn’t find him but then they used the drones and it helped to find him, so they caught him like that People are drag racing cars on proctor valley and or going fast, we need more police giving warnings or tickets it is very dangerous Reduced impact on traffic and environmental issues CRIME IS INCREASING (1.0 %) Because 3 weeks ago my work van got broken into and I’ve been hearing about more crimes also so let them put drones out Because there is a lot of violence and doing that might give them an advantage in solving the issue Crime in Chula vista has gotten worse over the years; and I just have had multiple issues with the involvement of police in several of those cases where there wasn’t something that was a factor or there wasn’t enough proof of the crime Crime in Chula vista seems on increase no longer feel safe walking for exercise or to do errands why isn't city rolling out expanded more comprehensive programs to help unsheltered and extremely destitute residents of our city I TRUST THE POLICE/I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE (0.8%) Again, I have nothing to hide I don't have anything to hide I don’t think the government will do something to hurt the people and I feel it’s good for the community I have nothing to hide I trust the pd and I am not a criminal I trust the police 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 643 of 810 Appendix B Page 14 OTHER (4.7 %) Because too many homeless, not enough funding Don't approve Drones can't kill people of color however you are somewhat invading citizens privacy I don't think it's good I hate thugs I have a brother-in-law who is a Chula vista police officer If they don’t have body cams, I approve of it Invasion of privacy Invasion of privacy of innocent people and potential for abuse It is because it is a good program where no one can get hurt It's a good idea Program Yes NOTHING/DON’T KNOW (6.8%) N/A (4) No comment None (3) Not sure Saves helicopter surveillance Nothing (9) REASONS TO DISAPPROVE (N=92) PRIVACY CONCERNS/GOVERNMENT OVERREACH (78.5%) 1984 A lot of this programs and software are equipped with software that contain biometrics the us government doesn’t have jurisdiction over the technology that is stored in Chinese technology Abuse of program and invasion of privacy, worsening of profiling Again, mass surveillance the government is taking too much control Again, there’s more chance it will be misused Because I believe that as individuals, we have the right to privacy Because I do not trust the police in a way that benefits the public and that they do the right thing by using that type of technology and that it is equally equal for everyone and does not depend on how people look at themselves Concern for privacy; constitutional rights of privacy and overreach of government; it’s very different from license plates and tracking criminals; we have lost too many private property rights Don't trust drones think it’s an invasion of privacy Trust people more Extreme invasion of privacy, has not kept us safer, don’t trust police at all and want the whole department redone Feel like some people need their privacy For security reasons Freedom 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 644 of 810 Appendix B Page 15 Getting into people’s life; like a police state; I hear it humming above my house; weeding several times I do not think private citizens should be under surveillance any time I don’t trust people not to spy on others It's too easy to invade privacy I just don’t like them using drones this could invade the privacy of residents I think personal privacy in gatherings makes it feel like you’re being watched even if you’re not breaking the law in general you feel watched I think that I do not approve; I am not happy that they are seeing me I think that it violates people’s right to privacy in their homes and yards If they’re going to use drones for incidents, active incidents, that’s one thing but if they’re just going to be sending drums around looking for crap, that’s invasive Infringing on privacy of individuals Intrusive Intrusive on the privacy of people Invading my privacy, I don’t like surveillance of innocent people and I am one of them Invasion of my privacy Invasion of privacy It can be used to spy on other people like innocent bystanders It could be an abuse of power It intrudes on our privacy It is none of their of their business; stay out of my backyard; I don’t believe in a police state It’s a slippery slope- I’d prefer not to live in a surveillance state Might be use just to spy More of my privacy if it’s too close to my window My concern is that this will be a steppingstone to escalate further surveillance of normal behaviors and interactions that may be misinterpreted and may have a negative impac t on the community trust in the police department My privacy Overstepping my personal freedoms and invasion of privacy Police end up recording and viewing events that they normally would not have access to without drone access These video feeds are easily recorded and could be used to go after people who are not under criminal investigation huge invasion of privacy for Possibility of mass surveillance, noise, safety Privacy (6) Privacy act Privacy and data security and governance Privacy and government overreach Privacy and limits use of drones Privacy concerns, and safety Privacy invasion Privacy issues Privacy our right to privacy Privacy people are against communism Privacy; I don’t feel that they should be doing that Probable invasion of privacy Already there are occasional drones over my home Safety and privacy 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 645 of 810 Appendix B Page 16 See them flying over my house, could easily look into property and backyard They can just film me going somewhere Surveillance of unknowing citizens Surveillance without probable cause is against the law Let’s all take a moment in learn about United States laws before implementing technology that violates our civil liberties otherwise, we are no better than 3rd world countries The definition of incidents is up to the police to determine It’s another chance to surveil the citizens without oversight or significant need The PD should not be able to do or use anything the ordinary citizen can't The privacy There is no way of regulating what the drone is filming The purpose for which it is being used for active crime scenes it's ok but no just flying around the city snooping on residents They can fly a drone anywhere in the neighborhood and can use the data it will disturb my privacy in my backyard They'll use words like " to keep the public safe" but I feel it'll be use for more purposes than that When you fly drones, you collect more information that's not in the best interest of the public They’ll be using it to take away people’s privacy This is also hyper surveillance I don't want police watching me and my community Too easy to violate rights for privacy Too much big brother, not enough privacy Too much Big government Too much surveillance, I understand it’s fir good reasons, I just don’t like seeing them, makes me feel spied on Violates privacy Waste of tax dollars and invasion of privacy We don’t know what they are truly using it for Who wants to be watched 24/7 Will be abused You never know when they invade your private property, they may record thing you don’t approve WASTE OF RESOURCES (7.9%) Not sure the purpose and usage is worth the resources utilized We should not be wasting our cities resources buying more toys for our occupying army; the goal of putting more people in jail is counter to solving our cities problems; punitive justice is not justice and leaves our communities poorer and worse off OTHER (10.6 %) Because they annoy me Depends on where the incident is occurring and how the drone is being utilized I don’t know how I feel about drones flying around in general I think it’s because there wasn't information provided before I think they can get the information on their own Invasion It depends on what it will be used for It should be for both police officers and the public 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 646 of 810 Appendix B Page 17 It doesn’t deal with the issue of the city not being able to hire police officers It stops you by using these stop gaps It is because it invades air space that the military needs Videos don’t capture everything NOTHING/DON’T KNOW (2.9%) I have not heard about it; not informed enough Nothing 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 647 of 810 Appendix C Page 1 Q16. What have you seen, read, or heard, if anything, about the city of Chula Vista’s Automated License Plate Reader program? *Percentages reflect weighting procedure THEY'RE BEING USED (7.8%) A bit A lot and I supposed it A lot, a read the report regarding this issue during the council meetings that addressed alp Am somewhat familiar with the tech have no knowledge of Chula Vista’s use of it Everything Heard about thought it would be helpful Heard very little I am aware of this I have heard about it because I know someone in law enforcement who says they use it for their job I have heard of it I am aware of the system and support 100 % I have heard that the system was going to be implemented and it seems good to me I have not heard about Chula Vista’s license plate reader program but am aware of one that was implemented in la I have seen, read, and heard about the program I haven’t heard about Chula Vista’s policy, but I do know what it is I haven’t heard anything specific about CVPD, but I know some agencies use them I heard a little no specifics, just remember hearing it was going to be implemented I heard it exist and that it was functional I just heard about the use I know they have the capability of deploying it but do not know if they have or no t I only know the devices are used I read briefly not I am not too concerned; it'll cut down on taxes; information is already public information I've read about it, and I approve I’ve heard about the program but not sure how it will be used I’ve heard that they have it I’m not overly fond of the idea I’ve heard that they use them It’s in use Know about it Limited info Not much, but in principle I disagree with any automated system trying to track and site citizens of the community automatically Only aware some police cars are equipped Only that is been implemented Only that there is one Probably heard about it 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 648 of 810 Appendix C Page 2 Seen in other communities Some (2) Sorry I haven’t heard too much about it aside from the definition That they are in use; it’s regulations and oversight are a mystery to me That they have a reader They use them Very little Very little do not know much Yes (8) Yes, a little Yes, and I don't like it Yes, at a public meeting READ/SEEN NEWS STORIES (4.0 %) I have heard about it on the news; I think that is good I have heard about this on the news on television I have read a number of articles; tech books on scanning; data information collected on automobiles; it violates my individual rights; I am totally against reader license program I have read several articles about the subject I have read some articles published last year I have read some news stories about it I have seen and heard about it in the news, and it should only be used in violent crimes not just for the city to make money from traffic violations or nonviolent crimes I’ve seen news stories Local channels have talked about the program Media is attacking a good program to keep us safe News Newsprint, digital media and neighbors On the radio Online articles and local newspapers Read Read it was under consideration Read online and was unaware that Chula Vista was not thinking about it Social media That would be a violation of reasonable cause to get up on my business Yes, from VOSD Yes, I have heard about it on NPR and have read several articles, as well although I think it is a nice feature for the officers, I don't think driver's should be pulled over for lapsed registration alone Yes, news reports Yes, on local news reports about that info being shared with other law enforcement agen cies; especially federal ones 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 649 of 810 Appendix C Page 3 INFORMATION SHARED W/OTHER AGENCIES (2.4 %) I heard they stopped using it because it was being shared with ICE I know that they perform the license plate reading and we’re sharing with out of state and federal agencies court case disallowed this practice I read criticism in the newspaper that the program shares information with other entities I saw a news article where they shared it with us customs; it made me extremely concerned that plates were being shared with other agencies I’ve heard about that, and I know there’s a number of people concerned; it comes down to who has access to the data as they were sharing it pretty widely with other departments; supposedly they aren’t doing that anymore so as long as the information It records data from all vehicles and occupants in its view and sends the info to different law enforcement agencies It's also used by other jurisdictions and is able to recover stolen vehicles and identity expired tags more quickly that a human eye, by far Read that it allows police to find law breakers easier in dozens of cities across America That the information can and has been shared with other entities it doesn't matter what type of entity, any sharing is a violation also, I don't believe a single word from any aspect of our city government That they gathered and sold our data across the country in violation of my privacy rights That they might use it to illegally deport people Yes, where data is shared with SANDAG and other agencies nationwide PRIVACY CONCERNS/GOVERNMENT OVERREACH (1.5%) I have read that privacy and immigration activists fear the LPR cameras will be used to enforce immigration I have read that some people fear the LPR cameras will allow the police to track the movements of innocent people all over the city I learned of the program via NPR - this is no doubt a violation of public citizen’s privacy and I remain supremely confident that all data collected will eventually, by some party, be misused Invasion of privacy Know about it and it is, and it is an invasion of privacy Only some information-not much I don’t know how much of an invasion of privacy it would bring Privacy is in decline Recordings were being used for more than just license plates is what I heard Sometimes videos might impact innocent people and doesn’t tell the full story That the cops can just ride up and down the road and pull over any car that their system flags Violation of our civil liberties, we must secure the future for our youth, but not th is way, by violating our freedoms Violation of privacy Wasted resources; big brother butting in people’s lives Yes, including a privacy policy that tells me that they are invading my privacy does not make the situation better 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 650 of 810 Appendix C Page 4 PEOPLE FIND IT CONTROVERSIAL (1.5 %) A lot of people don’t like it Activists are outraged about lack of civilian oversite criminals as well are opposed to the increase in police ability to apprehend their colleagues I heard there’s controversy around it and they were considering suspending its use It exists and is somewhat controversial to others Its potentially problematic Only complaints that it doesn’t work 100%, 100% of the time it will cost more to fix the mistakes People were concerned about the plates being read by them and I don’t understand the purpose of why they are doing that That people don’t understand what they are used for There is some controversy some believe that data is, or can be, used against minorities SCANS LICENSE PLATES (0.6 %) I’ve heard the police have implemented it and that it can scan a certain number of cars in it circumference That it works with scanners That they can read a lot of licenses at one time and know a lot about that person instantly They’re monitoring for criminal activity and also to make sure plates are up to date Yes, it scans license plates driving by OTHER (3.5 %) At some traffic lights Can have errors Everything stated is bs, they fly over us in a parking lot doing nothing all the time, the city should train actual professionals people, not drones, in social work, mental health, etc. and place extreme vetting on all police to make sure they understand Good I am a retired banker my customer invented a license plate reader I believe this is a product that is essential in this era to fight crime I have heard of it my car was stolen and that is how it was found I have heard very little, but I think it can be a useful tool if not abused I heard it was cut back the use has been greatly reduced I know the company the city is using for the cameras I understand the program I ushered the technology in years ago in it for police I integrated it with personnel I was part of coalition that tried to take that program down I’ve heard that even though there are very few vehicles using it, at any given time, at least one of those vehicles is on patrol, so the technology is ultimately always in use If it is used for right things, it help to reduce crime but I’m not sure how Chula Vista use If properly used and used for their purpose, I approve but if they are used for other situations I disapprove If run a red light, photo of plate will be taken If you got nothing to hide that it should not be a problem Is very advanced 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 651 of 810 Appendix C Page 5 Little doubtful about that seems unfair Same as drone use; innocent Then there is nothing to hide, nothing to fear Seen them flyover the neighborhood That it helps police without endangering officers That they have it at the mall (Otay ranch) There’s been counter and it’s been miss placed Very bad idea We’ll worth the time and money Well, it is to make the streets better NOTHING/DON’T KNOW (78.7 %) 1st time hearing about it Do not know anything about this program Don't know Don’t know much about it Don’t know, is that a good thing? First time I have heard of it First time I heard of this First, I hear of it better not be used to give out traffic violation tickets Have not heard (2) Have not heard about it (3) Have not heard about it at all Have not heard anything (4) Have not heard anything but do not trust city leadership to use the data Have not heard or read about it Have not seen, read or heard Haven't heard anything about it Haven't heard of it Haven’t hear about it at all Haven’t hear anything Haven’t heard about it (2) Haven’t heard about it, my concern is that Californ ia is so corrupt that any video can and will be used and abused can we please be honest I know and love and work with police officers daily, they are normal people too and I support them completely b Haven’t heard anything (2) Haven’t heard anything about it Haven’t heard anything but approve since I got my plates removed from my car Heard nothing about it Heard nothing about this Hello I do not know anything about this I do not understand the question I don't even know such a program exist until now I don't recall I don’t care 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 652 of 810 Appendix C Page 6 I don’t have information I don’t know I don’t know about it I don’t know much about that I have heard nothing I have heard nothing at all I have not heard (2) I have not heard about until now I have not heard of anything concerning this topic I have not heard of it I have not listened I have not seen anything I have not yet been made aware of that program this is the first mention of it that I have seen I haven't I haven't heard anything about it I haven't seen any of that show I haven’t heard anything about the automated license plate reader program I haven’t heard anything I’ll all for safety but I’m against over taxing and overregulating everything! We have enough of that with the state don’t impose more fees on the community and businesses I haven’t heard much to give my opinion on it I haven’t seen read or heard anything about automated license plate readers, but I was a victim of a crime and I wish they had more cameras on the freeways to read license plates because maybe they would have found the person that shot me I know nothing (2) I was unaware I’m not familiar I’m not familiar with the automated license plate reader program I’m unfamiliar with it N/A (10) Negative responses Never heard (3) Never heard of it (4) News to me No (43) No comment No idea sorry No knowledge No sure how it works No, but I am in support of the initiative should not concern law abiding citizens No, I have not heard about the license plate reader it’s a good idea to have license plate reader to find stolen car No, I have not heard anything No, I haven’t No, never None (18) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 653 of 810 Appendix C Page 7 None I only hear crickets with this mayor None so far never heard of any comment or may have been a party to having my car’s license plate read by such a device at least not that I know of None, which shows there is little to no information distributed to residents Nope (2) Not at all (3) Not aware (3) Not aware of this program Not familiar Not heard (2) Not heard about it Not heard anything (2) Not heard much Not much (10) Not much - I have heard the term used Not much at all Not necessary Not seen Not the cv version but heard about it in general Not very much Nothing (183) Nothing at all Nothing doesn’t sound good Nothing much Nothing on this topic Nothing really and I subscribe to CVPD and cv fb and twitter Nothing, I didn't know Nothing, I’m unaware of this This is the first time I heard this Unsure, sounds ok Until today I hear it, I was not aware Zero 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 654 of 810 Appendix D Page 1 Q18. What is the main reason you approve/disapprove of the program? *Percentages reflect weighting procedure REASONS TO APPROVE (N=399) DETER/REDUCE/SOLVE CRIMES (31.5%) Again, if they’re going to use it during an active incident, I can see value in that If they’re just randomly going around looking to “catch “people, I disapprove Allows police to investigate crime more efficiently and effectively As a tool for fighting crime as crimes get more sophisticated the tools to fight crime need to be on the same levels We’ve been victims of a hit and run, we have had vehicles stolen we; therefore, cameras in my opinion are a plus Assists in resolving criminal activity Be able to leverage technology to improve services and aid in the investigation of cases will be helpful Because I know crimes happen like nearby that someone got killed and they know nothing about who did it sometime people drive crazy on the road and the cameras help Because that way it would automatically locate a license plate with a report of a crime Because that way they have proof, and they would not be that if one thing and not another Better information to aid with investigating a crime Better investigative tools, technology is aiding the community eliminate crime Keeping illegal vehicles off the streets and penalizing law breakers is in the benefit of the community and families Can be helpful in responding to crimes and life-threatening emergencies Can easily identify cars that have some sort of criminal record attached to it Can help combat crime in a proactive manner Could be good for theft Could be helpful in solving crimes Crime Crime control Crime deterrent Crime prevention Due to the high rate of violence Eliminate crime and increase police officer safety Enough crime being captured by people's home surveillance cameras that actually goes nowhere If police had these vehicle license plates on their own file system in their own cars, maybe some of these Crooks would be captured or at least stopped sooner, r Especially if they use it to solve crimes Fight crime For its potential to do good, help solve crimes etc. For our own help; what if I\family etc. suffer a crime we can have recordings and that can be helpful 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 655 of 810 Appendix D Page 2 Good to investigate possible criminal activity hopefully they don't use the information inappropriately Good tool for police to use to solve crimes Help find stolen vehicles Help narrow down crime suspects quicker Help reduce crime Help solve crimes Help to question other people in the area that may have seen something Help with investigations and solving crimes Help with law and order, too much crime Helps control crime (2) Helps solve crimes Helps stop/ solve crime Hopefully stop crime I approve of its use for local crime I do not approve of this data being forwarded to outside agencies, even federal ones I believe it helps police departments ability to solve crimes I can see it as a useful tool in investigations I support any effort to reduce crime in our communities I support whatever tools necessary I’ve nothing to hide I think it is good information for convicting crimes after that they have been caught I think under this economy crime rate will be increased I watch a lot of detective shows and I know that it can be helpful in proving someone was somewhere at that time so I think it would help to solve crimes I wish we were more like the UK with CCTV to capture criminal activity When our son was mugged in CV the license number of the vehicle was captured by a reader on a patrol car in National City If a crime has been committed, then knowing who was hanging around that area at that time could lead to vital information to solving the crime If anything helps to do good job to investigate, then it’s okay with me for any and all law enforcement If it helps crime, why not If it helps fight crime, I am all for it If it helps investigate crime, why not? If it helps solve a crime, then that’s good as long as it’s not used to pinpoint minorities If it helps the police deal more effectively with crime, I am in favor If it makes the job easier to help and solve more crimes in the city If it will help solve a crime and bring justice If it’s being used for crimes, then sure I approve If it’s just to get info of the surrounding vehicles for crime investigation I think that would be fine If more drivers are aware may deter crime If there is a crime being committed and it helps solve the crime, I am all for it there are too many things that go unsolved I have had lots of problems with homeless with vandalism If they are going to do something good like fight crime If they can help solve a crime because of the reader it is beneficial It allows officers to track down illegal activity more efficien tly It assists in solving serious crimes 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 656 of 810 Appendix D Page 3 It deters crime and helps solve crimes It helps fight crime which is a good thing It helps investigations for situations that can occur in the future It helps solve crime It may reduce crime It provides a wealth of information very inexpensively which can be used to solve crimes and or apprehend fugitives It seems like a fairly easy way to help solve crimes It will be able to solve things better with witnesses in the area It will help a lot against crime It will help solve more crimes It will lower crime and traffic that has no business doing in the city It would be handy to identify crime or any suspicious activities It’s a crime prevention tool It’s a good idea for crimes/ accidents Just because there is no witness does not mean there was no crime This will provide a witness Keeps crime down Leg up on solving possible crimes License plates are issued for the purpose of identifying a vehicle and potentially identifying the registered owner and address LPR cameras seem to make that process efficient if used within reasonable situations such as criminal investigations May help in crime investigations Maybe it will keep some of the crime down Normally witnesses are not found, or criminals just get away Not based on the situation; more has to do with get the proper evidence to crack down on suspicious activity; license plate a vital tool to track any situation; mostly based on personal experience Police officers jobs are to continually work to serve, patrol and investigate That program serves in allowing them to investigate during their routine patrols Prevent crime Proper ID of illegal behavior Property Crimes are too high in the area Minimal push meant Provides additional information Provides possible witness information Public safety Reduce crime Reduce crime rate Reducing crime, preventing crime and solving crimes is the most important thing in a community to keep it safe So that it would help investigate a crime or catch someone who did a crime So, they can have more information to investigate crime Solving crimes, but wouldn't want it to be used randomly That it deters crime; anything that deters crime is good as far as I’m concerned; I have faith in our police department; I don’t have a negative feeling about our police The data is used to get criminals off the street 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 657 of 810 Appendix D Page 4 The faster the police obtain information to carry out an investigation, the better results they will have The main reason is to help the police in solving crimes The reduce crime There are people who never seem to follow traffic safety rules, if they are aware of the police cars having readers maybe they will dry more safely and the police cannot be everywhere, let’s say someone has kidnapped a child, if the plate reader Again if they’re going to use it during an active incident, I can see value in that If they’re just randomly going around looking to “catch “people, I disapprove Allows police to investigate crime more efficiently and effectively As a tool for fighting crime as crimes get more sophisticated the tools to fight crime need to be on the same levels We’ve been victims of a hit and run, we have had vehicles stolen we; therefore, cameras in my opinion are a plus Assists in resolving criminal activity Be able to leverage technology to improve services and aid in the investigation of cases will be helpful Because I know crimes happen like nearby that someone got killed and they know nothing about who did it sometime people drive crazy on the road and the cameras help Because that way it would automatically locate a license plate with a report of a crime Because that way they have proof, and they would not be that if one thing and not another Better information to aid with investigating a crime Better investigative tools, technology is aiding the community eliminate crime Keeping illegal vehicles off the streets and penalizing law breakers is in the benefit of the community and families Can be helpful in responding to crimes and life-threatening emergencies Can easily identify cars that have some sort of criminal record attached to it Can help combat crime in a proactive manner Could be good for theft Could be helpful in solving crimes Crime Crime control Crime deterrent Crime prevention Due to the high rate of violence Eliminate crime and increase police officer safety Enough crime being captured by people's home surveillance cameras that actually goes nowhere If police had these vehicle license plates on their own file system in their own cars, maybe some of these Crooks would be captured or at least stopped sooner, r Especially if they use it to solve crimes Fight crime For its potential to do good, help solve crimes etc. For our own help; what if I\family etc. suffer a crime we can have recordings and that can be helpful Good to investigate possible criminal activity Hopefully they don't use the information inappropriately Good tool for police to use to solve crimes Help find stolen vehicles 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 658 of 810 Appendix D Page 5 Help narrow down crime suspects quicker Help reduce crime Help solve crimes Help to question other people in the area that may have seen something Help with investigations and solving crimes Help with law and order, too much crime Helps control crime (2) Helps solve crimes Helps stop/ solve crime Hopefully stop crime I approve of its use for local crime I do not approve of this data being forwarded to outside agencies, even federal ones I believe it helps police departments ability to solve crimes I can see it as a useful tool in investigations I support any effort to reduce crime in our communities I support whatever tools necessary I’ve nothing to hide I think it is good information for convicting crimes after that they have been caught I think under this economy crime rate will be increased I watch a lot of detective shows and I know that it can be helpful in proving someone was somewhere at that time so I think it would help to solve crimes I wish we were more like the UK with CCTV to capture criminal activity When our son was mugged in CV the license number of the vehicle was captured by a reader on a patrol car in National City If a crime has been committed, then knowing who was hanging around that area at that time could lead to vital information to solving the crime If anything helps to do good job to investigate, then it’s okay w ith me for any and all law enforcement If it helps crime, why not If it helps fight crime, I am all for it If it helps investigate crime, why not? If it helps solve a crime, then that’s good as long as it’s not used to pinpoint minorities If it helps the police deal more effectively with crime, I am in favor If it makes the job easier to help and solve more crimes in the city If it will help solve a crime and bring justice If it’s being used for crimes, then sure I approve If it’s just to get info of the surrounding vehicles for crime investigation I think that would be fine If more drivers are aware may deter crime If there is a crime being committed and it helps solve the crime, I am all for it there are too many things that go unsolved I have had lots of problems with homeless with vandalism If they are going to do something good like fight crime If they can help solve a crime because of the reader it is beneficial It allows officers to track down illegal activity more efficiently It assists in solving serious crimes It deters crime and helps solve crimes It helps fight crime which is a good thing It helps investigations for situations that can occur in the future It helps solve crime 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 659 of 810 Appendix D Page 6 It may reduce crime It provides a wealth of information very inexpensively which can be used to solve crimes and or apprehend fugitives It seems like a fairly easy way to help solve crimes It will be able to solve things better with witnesses in the area It will help a lot against crime It will help solve more crimes It will lower crime and traffic that has no business doing in the city It would be handy to identify crime or any suspicious activities It’s a crime prevention tool It’s a good idea for crimes/ accidents Just because there is no witness does not mean there was no crime This will provide a witness Keeps crime down Leg up on solving possible crimes License plates are issued for the purpose of identifying a vehicle and potentially identifying the registered owner and address LPR cameras seem to make that process effic ient if used within reasonable situations such as criminal investigations May help in crime investigations Maybe it will keep some of the crime down Normally witnesses are not found, or criminals just get away Not based on the situation; more has to do with get the proper evidence to crack down on suspicious activity; license plate a vital tool to track any situation; mostly based on personal experience Police officers jobs are to continually work to serve, patrol and investigate That program serves in allowing them to investigate during their routine patrols Prevent crime Proper ID of illegal behavior Property Crimes are too high in the area Minimal push meant Provides additional information Provides possible witness information Public safety Reduce crime Reduce crime rate Reducing crime, preventing crime and solving crimes is the most important thing in a community to keep it safe So that it would help investigate a crime or catch someone who did a crime So they can have more information to investigate crime Solving crimes, but wouldn't want it to be used randomly That it deters crime; anything that deters crime is good as far as I’m concerned; I have faith in our police department; I don’t have a negative feeling about our police The data is used to get criminals off the street The faster the police obtain information to carry out an investigation, the better results they will have The main reason is to help the police in solving crimes The reduce crime 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 660 of 810 Appendix D Page 7 There are people who never seem to follow traffic safety rules, if they are aware of the police cars having readers maybe they will dry more safely and the police cannot be everywhere, let’s say someone has kidnapped a child, if the plate reader sees t There need to be more resources to help police to prosecute and the people to address a situation with criminal activity a lot of times there is only one patrol car and it’s not enough They need the information to have the evidence for the crime; I don’t think they do it to spy on people; we live in a very complicated time, and we need very reasonable way To assist in solving future crimes To better help police forces solve crime, with the publics consent To detect crimes easily To deter crime To discover what the delinquents are doing To help catch criminals To help reduce crime To monitor crimes in the area To prevent crimes and help resolve crimes if it’s going to be used for that To reduce crime To solve crimes To solve crimes To take note of suspicious activity Too many traffic incidents involvin g altercations, speeding or fatalities Too much crime in this city now! We have to much crime and not enough is not being done but this helps Well because they have to work to finalize the crime or lower the crime in Chula Vista right now it’s a little bit high There need to be more resources to help police to prosecute and the people to address a situation with criminal activity a lot of times there is only one patrol car and it’s not enough They need the information to have the evidence for the crime; I don’t think they do it to spy on people; we live in a very complicated time, and we need very reasonable way To assist in solving future crimes To better help police forces solve crime, with the publics consent To detect crimes easily To deter crime To discover what the delinquents are doing To help catch criminals To help reduce crime To monitor crimes in the area To prevent crimes and help resolve crimes if it’s going to be used for that To reduce crime To solve crimes (2) To take note of suspicious activity Too many traffic incidents involving altercations, speeding or fatalities Too much crime in this city now! We have to much crime and not enough is not being done but this helps Well because they have to work to finalize the crime or lower the crime in Chula Vista right now it’s a little bit high 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 661 of 810 Appendix D Page 8 PROMOTES SAFETY/SECURITY (1 6.9 %) Because I feel that even if at the current moment, they do not see the person they can be dangerous; for security Because I think it's just the safety for Chula Vista Because I think it’s important to have protection in that area Community safety For my safety and that of all the people who live in Chula Vista, safety is the main thing For safety purposes For the safety of other people I could go out calmer together with my family I feel is safe for police officers as well as a citizen I feel it is in the best interest of public safety; not quite familiar how technology being used I feel that the only way to keep the city safe and to realistically know who is in the city; follow up on people that were in the area at the time I think it would be good of the community I think it’s a good thing for the city If it makes people safer and they can get info to solve crimes it depends on what they do with the info It adds another layer of protection to the average citizen It's more security for everybody It’s for safety It’s for security Its makes a safer community Keep Chula Vista safe; great crime deterrent Keep city safe Keeps us safer Officer safety Potentially makes my life safer Probably keep us safer Public safety (2) Public safety and to better help investigate crimes Public safety is enhanced Safer neighborhood Safer streets Safety (10) Safety and evidence Safety and precision Safety issues, because safety issues Safety of the environment Safety purposes Save their time to confirm through the stations Security (5) The benefits of the program outweigh the risk public safety is important and reading l icense plates parked in public is a minor They are trying to help the community 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 662 of 810 Appendix D Page 9 To help apprehend law breakers and keep the general public safe To keep us SAFE I say outfit them All and be damned to the ones that say invasion of privacy These are weasels I would capture because they are doing something shady Why else would they be complaining We have cops for a reason If we can’t trust them We need more protection; we need more police support FIND MISSING PERSONS/CRIMINALS (1 6.5 %) Anything that can be used to find and prosecute criminals is a good thing Because I would want anything to help the police to get criminals Because it catches cheaters and the lawless Because it catches criminals Because the way they can catch a criminal it will be easier to track them Can find criminals Catch criminals Catch people easier Catches Chester’s Catching bad guys Catching criminals Catching crooks Child abductions, hit and run, drunk driving, road rage Correct reporting and finding the individual that’s at fault Crooks need to be caught Does keep away repeat offender doing crimes etch Expedite catching criminals Also keep people that don't belong driving off the streets Get criminals off the street Get the bad guys off the streets and protect the officers Good use of information for many different types of calls such as missing people and recovering stolen cars Help catch the bad guys, may misidentify honest citizens Help to get people that break the law Help with catch criminals Helps catch criminals Helps detectives with criminal ID Hope this can catch the criminal I believe in locking up bad guys I think anything that helps make jobs easier and catch criminals I think it helps to catch criminals I think it is necessary for the police dept to have access to criminal s by way of cameras for evidence I think it is violence and crimes; track persons that are causing I think it would help police to follow the incident of any kind of thing that happens or the perpetrator of a crime I think it’s a good way for them to catch people they’ve been trying to find; amber alerts, kidnapping, people that have warrants out I think there’s less privacy in our day to day lives and giving law enforcement more tools for identifying and tracking criminals 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 663 of 810 Appendix D Page 10 If it helps catching criminals, I will approve of it If it helps find people that are doing bad things is good but is bad when the readers miss read them; in Oakland there were reading the plates of people crossing the river bridge, so they need to have the right people viewing the reading technology If someone does something it will help catch them If someone is doing something wrong, they call identify them If technology can assist the police with safely removing criminals from the streets than why not If the technology can remove bad people off the streets, I am in support of the initiative If they can catch a criminal, its good If they’re taking pictures of someone’s license plate it is probably because they have committed or are suspected of committing a crime and those people han g out together so other license plates could be of other people involved If you have an amber alert, they can look it up In hopes of catching the wrong, illegals and warrants It allows the PD to find suspects via their vehicle use and can lead a more effic ient system of finding criminals It does help find people that violates the law, find stolen cars, so I can’t too much disagree with it but there are some flaws with it It will help catch criminals at a faster pace for police It works to take criminal’s off the street It would be helpful for amber alerts and such Locate criminals Locates and bolos One more tool to use to identify criminals Our city needs get rid of criminals Police cannot be everywhere, and crimes are committed so it makes it easier to catch people doing unlawful behavior Possible location of additional criminals Quick identification of suspected drivers So, they can catch people committing crimes and keep our neighborhood safe So, they can catch the bad guys Something needs to get done to catch criminals Sometimes if someone does something like commit a crime, they can go unpunished Sounds like it may be useful to catch criminals The police are important, this sounds good to help police find criminals There is a lot of crime in Chula Vista, and I think being able to identify people in an area is fine and useful They can catch criminal off the road and solve a crime They can locate who commits crimes They keep criminals off the street; if it is not misused then it is a good program Think that someone commits a crime needs to get caught To be able to track and/or apprehend criminals To catch criminals that they are not able to track down To catch criminals, which is the basic idea of the program; keep people out of neighborhoods that they don't belong To catch criminals/amber alerts 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 664 of 810 Appendix D Page 11 To tracking suspect HELPFUL TO POLICE (7.2%) A good technique for police to be affective in doing their work Because of their jobs; they have serious jobs; they have to be protected Chula Vista's just gotten outrageously huge, and the cops need all the help they can get Concerned our corrupt liberal government will misuse it I am aware it's a great tool for law enforcement Efficiency making the officers job easier and covering more area Enforcement tools Give the cops as many tools as they need Helps police I believe it could be helpful to any investigation I support Law Enforcement I think it is very helpful to the police I think they need all the help they can get If it helps, I support it Improve police work Increased capability for law enforcement However there are privacy concerns Innovative and helpful It can be beneficial It can help the low number of law enforcement bridge the gap with already overwhelming mounting duties they have to perform It could be helpful It could help if used correctly It makes the police more effective and less impartial, then I’m all for it It makes their job easier It takes away attention from the officer to look up the license plate they could use this, so they are able to focus on more important things It will be good for police to operate to find out what they need to Most anything that will aid law enforcement in protecting the community I’m in favor of Police need every advantage they can get to keep the community safe Relieves administrative burdens on police So many crimes are happening regularly that maybe law enforcement needs all the help they can get if they can’t hire enough peace’s officers So, they can do more efficiently their work That would be assistance to the police department There seems to be more crime and police can’t get to all right away To make it easier for police not enough police to do that Ways to have better enforcement 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 665 of 810 Appendix D Page 12 HELP WITH TRAFFIC INCIDENCES (6.2%) Because if something happens like an accident they will know how or what happened Because we have a race car problem here in Chula Vista, theft as well and I think it will help catch these people who put everyone in danger Helps find unpaid registrations and find cars via amber alert I think it will help people who are bad drivers get caught I've read about their use in other states in cracking down on unregistered vehicles and warrant violations It helps catch people driving illegally and cars not registered Like I said I was a victim of a crime just on my way to work on the freeway if they had cameras and people could get license plates of cars going onto the freeway, I’m all for it they would’ve caught the guy same thing but through the city people are More easily identify cars breaking traffic laws Taking abandoned cars off the road That the cameras do surveillance in order to improve traffic patterns and keep the flow of traffic There is a lot of racing in front of my house and vandalism To teach the population to respect traffic speeds and signs Too many dangerous drivers in our area Too many incompetent drivers roam the neighborhood We need only people with valid license to be on the road My wife was hit by a local resident with a Baja CA license According to our insurance the vehicle doesn't exist So, we couldn't connect from their insurance Illegal vehicles driving DATA COLLECTION (3.3 %) Feel like the more info the better Get information on possible criminal activity Improve speed of information to officer possibly pre warn them of possible confrontation If there is a problem, it offers another 'tool’ I am all for any information that can be gathered - by any means It helps give info ahead of time It just needs to be used for what it was intended for More accurate and definitive readings Provides tons of information Seems like another efficient way to increase level of knowledge they have The convenience to be able to access information before injecting yourself in a potentially dangerous situation could save lives obviously, plus as a critical care transport nurse who has had to get on scene in a timely fashion and may or may not have ben The more data the better They need the info To be able identify faster potential issues To be more informed and for more education To get important information Why not put same system on all patrol cars? Why not publish results data - number of criminals arrested, located, crimes investigated as result of system? Why not publicize which other cities are using same system & their results over specific periods of 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 666 of 810 Appendix D Page 13 NOTHING TO HIDE (2.1 %) All I can say is if you don’t have anything to hide; as long as it is for safety purposes; the police officers need to keep the community safe Because I’m not a criminal and I don’t have anything to worry about Because if you are not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear Good people have nothing to hide; if it helps police officer prosecute criminals more power to them I approve because if you haven't committed crimes or done anything wron g then you shouldn't be afraid I don't have anything to hide I have nothing to hide (2) I stay out of trouble; if they have to go catch the bad guys go catch them I'm usually not around somewhere to be involved in a crime, but if something has happened and my plate was identified I don't mind helping any way I can If that’s where the rest of the world is headed it’s the way of the future and if you didn’t do anything to get in trouble, why would you be concerned If you are doing something wrong only affecting those people; and doing something right will not affect people If you are innocent, you have nothing to hide I trust the police If you have nothing to hide, then you should not worry If you’re not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to hide, and I have nothing to hide FIND STOLEN CARS (2.1 %) Because they could have evidence from scanning vehicles, and it could help track stolen vehicles Because vehicle theft is a huge problem in San Diego County and southern California and it is on way of addressing that problem Combats auto theft I like the idea of them being able to track stolen cars I think it helps with stolen vehicles and tracking them In cases of crimes stolen cars, he runs, it will have the police find the perpet rators I also know that a hidden run car killed a female teenager and if it wasn’t for the cameras the driver would never have been caught It is very helpful in recovering stolen vehicles It will help them find stolen cars It's a game changer if the vehicle is stolen or extensively expired It's valuable for the police to possibly find a stolen car or other criminal activity The ability to locate stolen cars NO PUBLIC RIGHT TO PRIVACY (1.2 %) Because license plates are made to be seen; supposed to be exposed in public; ideally will cut down on crime; like find stolen cars Drivers do not have a right to privacy in public areas or places seen like driveways I approve because they already do it, they run your plates when they are behind you I think it is OK, if a vehicle or person is in a public place, they have no right to believe I cannot be photographed or tape recorded by any buddy, private person, or news, or police If you’re out in public, then your actions are noticed by other people 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 667 of 810 Appendix D Page 14 It’s just that peoples cars are in a public location License plates are public information so why not The cars are in a public area and this information is not private I am not concerned with the tracking of my car’s location When they are behind people, they check license plates anyway so why not be proficient IMPROVE RESPONSE TIMES (0.7%) Because it looks like it could help our first responders I think it could save time Probably faster response to patrol officers Time saving OTHER (8.8 %) Accountability Accountability Applying technology to real life problems Automatic identification Because I have had somebody steal my bicycle that was in my patio Because it has nothing to do with the person, it is only the registration; They go after numbers and not how people look Because like I said what happened last month to our house, the burglary we are still looking for the criminals Changes are that high ranking police and or politicians will misuse the drones, etc. Faster identification Food Haven’t heard of it, but sounds like a good idea I haven’t seen all the info though, so I might change my mind, after seeing details Helpful to a shorthanded department I don't live in the stone age I have a couple of things stolen and they did not look into it I have a hard of hearing sticker on my bumper I am hard of hearing I quit driving if I were still driving it would be fine I see no reason why this would be an immoral practice I see nothing wrong with it as well as using body cams I think it can be helpful to identify some cars; and again, it comes down to as long as they don’t share their information to other agencies I would say bring native to Chula Vista I’ve seen a lot and too much illegal operations going on In neighborhoods, It can cause some problems to some people It helps distinguish what people are doing when certain things happen It seems to be a move in the right direction but with advanced technologies also comes change and trust issues It’s a good idea Its limited in scope Limited resources by police 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 668 of 810 Appendix D Page 15 Long as it stays on patrol cars, it is fine More respect Not all bad Own interest Reason provided is a good reason Reduces the opportunity for misuse of police powers by recording all interactions Technology should be used to benefit society NOTHING/DON’T KNOW (3.6%) Don't know N/A (4) None None Not sure Nothing (3) REASONS TO DISAPPROVE (N=171) POLICE MISUSE (37.1 %) 1984 As I mentioned earlier, anytime data is collected without consent, I feel it’s a violation of folks rights also, I do not have any faith in CVPD’s oversight of this project Because it is surveillance, and they will be scanning random plates Because it might be cops out there, they won the license plate only on minorities never white people Because they already have a database from DMV; they would just be scanning license plates just o scan them Because we are not absolutely sure they are staying in the confines of what they are meant to be doing Big brother Big brother activity's infringe on privacy Big brother doesn’t need to be snooping around Big brother is watching Bit of an invasion I get the reasons though Danger to freedom Easier to wrongly profile people Easy to be misused by the officers if they are not reputable Free country- too much policing Have you not seen minority report I believe its invasive and puts a lot of innocent people at risk I disapprove of any action the looks to fund or empower the police the police is an occupying force which's purpose in society is to enforce the oppression of the capitalist class we should be working to abolish the police and come up with community bas I do not approve of police surveillance of people who are not committing crime, or where they don’t have evidence that a crime has been committed 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 669 of 810 Appendix D Page 16 I don’t think preemptively mass collecting data on residents to later use for criminal investigations should be allowed the pd should collect evidence after obtaining necessary permissions/warrants while conducting an active investigation I don’t trust what they will do with that information outside specific scope I don’t want them to photograph my license plate I kind of get like it’s an invasion of privacy like giving a huge part of who you are and especially the lack of police accountability I’m a product of the 50s I don’t like invasion of privacy I hold it very highly and I think wave invaded our privacy with technology beyond what we know, and I believe you be able to have privacy In some cases, it’s been used to track innocent people to track them that they’re not going to whe re people of authority think they should be; I think it’s an invasion of privacy Increase surveillance state, can be used to increase move towards a totalitarian police state Infringe my rights Infringement It may start something when there isn’t a crime It won’t be used for what it’s supposed to be used for they will have an edge It’s just abuse by the police Opens public up to possible rights abuse 4th amendment Our personal information is being shared with other agencies; general information is being breached Power can be abused and taking a picture for the system doesn’t seem necessary Recording people who’ve done nothing wrong is wrong Surveillance Surveillance without warrants opens the doors to much more invasions of our civil liberties we do not want to go this road That it will be abused, so they can get money The police will use it on nonviolent crimes to make money for the city, will use it on people with minor offenses to make money for the city There could be abuse They can possibly use that information for other reasons other than to investigate This is hyper surveillance, which I am strongly against if I haven't done anything, I don't want my car to be recorded in any way Too much control for the government and will be used against society in the future Too much government and too much control we are supposed to be in a more stable society and be free Too much intrusion of rights, existing laws are not being ‘enforced Waste of resources; too much getting into people’s lives Will lead to abuse PRIVACY CONCERNS (25.5 %) 4th amendment; significant privacy issues Because that is privacy; if you are borrowing a car; if a mother and child are driving; had an incident where son sold car people did not register car; received notice of car impounded Data being used for other purposes, misuse of information Feels like an invasion of privacy too 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 670 of 810 Appendix D Page 17 I am a huge proponent of personal liberty and privacy while I also abhor crime and want crimes solved, personal liberty and privacy is worth protecting I believe that invade my privacy and that’s we are protect in our constitution so no to this plate monitoring I don't think it's very correct because they invade people's privacy I don’t need them taking pics of my car I like my own privacy I think it could infringe on privacy because on how advanced it can get photographing you never know what can happen but it can cut down crime so it could be good it's like a double edge sword it can be good or bad I think it’s a little too much taking away privacy I think its invasive I think there should be privacy; not use a blanket of info because it can be used the wrong way If no crime has been committed it seems overreach to document property just in case, China does this and I’m not ok with it Intrusiveness into the privacy of the people it’s becoming police state literally Invasion of privacy (3) Invasion of privacy and constitutional rights Invasion of privacy local government tracking citizens is not appropriate Invasion of privacy of 99 percent of population Invasion of privacy the police have better things to do he always complain that they have too much work this will get them even more work to do It is a clear invasion of privacy for the police to be able to track me while I am going about my day, they will only know of someone's criminal activity after they've already been tracking them It is a violation of privacy It is an invasion of privacy; police have the right to take photos of my license plate out on the streets and I don't like that It is because I want my privacy It's feels invasive It’s an invasion of privacy and gives too much power to the police to use the information in any way they want there is no oversight on its use It’s an invasion of privacy, also it’s treating everyone like a criminal Misuse of privacy My privacy is important this violate my constitutional right I need more info on this topic before they vote No private information should be scanned and kept in any way shape or form Privacy (15) Privacy abuse Privacy and data security are a concern Privacy and rights Privacy I didn't do anything for you to need my license plate Privacy issue and what’s it is use for Privacy issues Privacy removed Privacy, government overreach Privacy, should only be used for reported items 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 671 of 810 Appendix D Page 18 Privacy; citizens privacy Privacy; its infringing on your privacy Privacy! It sounds like a police state big brother to the max Private information Seems like an invasion of privacy Sharing my info Still an invasion of privacy Violates my privacy Violates privacy What is the guarantee that this is a nit be manipulated and/or is not bias THE CAMERAS CAN BE WRONG (7.1 %) Accuracy Can have errors Concern that informs can be used for witch hunts and entangled innocent people in criminal investigations just because they were parked in a street Doesn’t sound like that has a way to minimize mistaken assumptions Human error with pictures and video I have seen the technology and none of these cameras work very well I do not think it is ready for prime time It could be handled wrong and could damage citizens It is so easy to be mistaken for a wanted person but as for me I have nothing to worry about It would be a form of control and it goes against my rights; it would lend itself to errors, mistakes Let’s say someone is having issue with their spouse and they go to someone else's home but wind up at different location then it causes problems for the person or spouse looking for help Let’s say they find inaccurate information People will steal license plates and others will be accused of crimes not committed by them Should have this for all cars passing through an intersection, for example, not just cars that happen to be nearby a police car could lead to false accusations The cameras sometimes don’t work they make mistakes To many mistakes Too many errors and flaws and a lot of times that is not your car or a car you just bought the DMV is unreal Trustworthy I do not trust that the Chula Vista police and how reliable is the reader how do we know they will not use it for something else NEED MORE INFORMATION (5.6%) Don’t know enough to understand the program I just need to learn more about I can’t really speak to it without knowledge I work for the county, and I would like to know more about it; I need more specifics Not enough information 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 672 of 810 Appendix D Page 19 IT WILL BE USED TO TARGET PEOPLE (5.1%) Chula vista police dept reputation is of racial profiling and targeting underrepresented communities Due to the high cases of misuse of power conduct I think this may give the police more reason to pull someone over for a time perhaps they have committed in the past and give them more of a bias reason to pull that person over It is only to screw the race for any infraction To me it will probably make it easier to target people if someone has a warrant, police officer who is high on power sees that then would try to pull them over and abuse/ kill them seems like a double-edged sword TOO DEPENDENT ON TECHNOLOGY (3.2 %) Again, another way for police to not do their job, not be trained appropriately, the city using funds for the wrong devices and wrong departments Because in feel like they should be out there doing it themselves not depending on technology just get out there and do your jobs Because the cops don’t have to look for an issue makes them lazy and nosy busybodies Feel that people can take information without getting information from the device I rather have the cop catch me than camera, making policemen lazy, taking jobs away from people If they want to write it down and look it up, I don’t think they should do it I’m an ex-officer and I don’t think they should do it Instead of looking later, they should be able to get the information then not later INDISCRIMINATE SCANNING (3.2%) Because I haven't heard of it; it's weird taking a picture ahead of time and look at it later Because it prejudges everybody in an automobile doing something illegal; so, it puts a “?” on every license plate that police acknowledge; therefore, it becomes a record on file; violates my constitutional freedom as an individual Exactly what criteria is used by these four officers when surveying vehicles The fact that its all-license plates all around and not specific or directed to crime Too proactive NO TRANSPARENCY/OVERSIGHT (2.5%) Because they are not being very transparent Oversight There have been several instances in which organizations that have automatically collected data on normal people have had their security measures breached and their data or used with malicious intent I do not have high confidence in the police There’s no proper oversight of the program Too general 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 673 of 810 Appendix D Page 20 OTHER (9.8 %) Because I feel like the money can be spent better, on other resources Feel like it’s just too much How is the data kept to only the police dept I don't drive that's why I disapprove I just disapprove I just do not think its beneficial I selected approve It's fishy It’s a new technology still newish everyone has a drone these days they can be easily confused by a civilian drone Motorola contract issues Probable cause Seems excessive Will it be used for only that purpose NOTHING/DON’T KNOW (1.0%) Not sure Nothing (2) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 674 of 810 Encuesta de Privacidad de Chula Vista n=600 Residentes de Chula Vista FINAL Translation note: Items highlighted in yellow do not need to be translated. Hola, ¿se encuentra ____ ? Hola, le habla _____ de Competitive Edge Research, una firma encuestadora nacional, y estamos llamando a las buenas personas de Chula Vista para pedir su opinión sobre cuestiones locales. Tenga por seguro que no le estamos vendiendo nada. A la mayoría de las personas les parece interesante, y esta es su oportunidad para que se escuche su voz, y todas sus respuestas serán totalmente confidenciales. Por favor permítame comenzar preguntando... P1. Con el objetivo de ayudarnos a entender mejor las diferentes áreas de Chula Vista, ¿podría decirme cuál es su código postal? (ENTER 5 DIGIT RESPONSE) (IF OUTSIDE CHULA VISTA, TERMINATE) P2. ¿Y en qué año nació? (ENTER 4-DIGIT RESPONSE) (IF POST-2004, TERMINATE) P3. ¿Usted piensa que las cosas en Chula Vista van por el camino correcto o por el camino incorrecto? (PROBE) 1. En el camino correcto, totalmente 2. En el camino correcto, algo 3. En el camino incorrecto, algo 4. En el camino incorrecto, totalmente 5. COMBINADO 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER Le haremos algunas preguntas acerca de seguridad pública, privacidad y tecnología. Con la finalidad de proporcionar servicios, las agencias gubernamentales, las organizaciones no lucrativas y las empresas recopilan datos personales como nombres, fechas de nacimiento y domicilios. Qué tan confiado está, si acaso, de que las siguientes entidades mantienen su información personal segura y privada... [RANDOMIZE Q4-Q5] [HALF OF RESPONDENTS GET Q4a, HALF GET Q4b] (PROBE) Extremadamente Muy Algo No Nada INSEGURO SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER confiado confiado confiado tan confiado confiado 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 P4a. El gobierno federal [SPLIT] P4b. Empresas en línea como Facebook y Amazon [SPLIT] P5. La Ciudad de Chula Vista 1 Extremadamente confiado 2 Muy confiado 3 Algo confiado 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 675 of 810 4 No tan confiado 5 Nada confiado 8 NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9 SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER P6. ¿Qué tanto confía en que el Departamento de Policía de Chula Vista implemente políticas que sean en beneficio del público? ¿Confía mucho, algo, no demasiado o nada? (PROBE) 1. Mucho 2. Algo 3. No demasiado 4. Nada 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER P7a. Hay cámaras fijadas en algunos postes de semáforos en intersecciones en Chula Vista. El video en vivo de estas cámaras se envía al centro de gestión de tráfico de la ciudad, donde los ingenieros lo usan para la sincronización de las señales en un esfuerzo por mejorar el flujo y la seguridad del tráfico. ¿Usted aprueba o desaprueba el uso de la ciudad de cámaras en los semáforos? (PROBE) 1. Apruebo, totalmente 2. Apruebo, algo 3. Desapruebo, algo 4. Desapruebo, totalmente 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER P7b. La Ciudad de Chula Vista está considerando adoptar una nueva política de protección de privacidad en un esfuerzo para hacer que el uso de la ciudad de las nuevas tecnologías sea transparente y eficiente. ¿Qué tan importante es para usted, s i acaso, que la ciudad adopte dicha política? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente importante 2 Muy importante 3. Algo importante 4. No muy importante 5. Nada importante 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER [ROTATE DRONE AND LICENSE PLATE READER BATTERIES AND TRACK] P8. ¿Qué ha visto, leído o escuchado, si acaso, sobre el uso de la Ciudad de Chula Vista de drones para fines policiales? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 676 of 810 (ACLARAR PARA OBTENER DETALLES, INTRODUCIR RESPUESTA, SI NO ESTÁ SEGURO PREGUNTAR: “¿Está seguro de que no se le viene nada a la mente?”) P9. ¿Aprueba o desaprueba el uso de drones por parte del Departamento de Policía de Chula Vista, que implica que la policía lance un dron que proporcione video en vivo desde lo alto de un incidente? (PROBE) 1. Apruebo, totalmente 2. Apruebo, algo 3. Desapruebo, algo 4. Desapruebo, totalmente 5. COMBINADO [SKIP TO Q11] 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO [SKIP TO Q11] P10. ¿Cuál es la principal razón por la que aprueba/desaprueba el programa? (ACLARAR PARA OBTENER DETALLES, INTRODUCIR RESPUESTA, SI NO ESTÁ SEGURO PREGUNTAR: “¿Está seguro de que no se le viene nada a la mente?”) [ROTATE PRO AND CON BATTERIES AND TRACK] Dígame qué tan beneficioso, si acaso, piensa que son los siguientes aspectos del programa de drones. [RANDOMIZE Q11-Q12] P11. El dron puede llegar a la escena del incidente y proporcionar video en vivo a la policía minutos antes de que la patrulla llegue para que los agentes de policía que acudan sepan qué esperar cuando lleguen. ¿Esto es extremadamente beneficioso, muy beneficioso, algo beneficioso, no tan beneficioso o nada beneficioso para la comunidad? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente beneficioso 2. Muy beneficioso 3. Algo beneficioso 4. No tan beneficioso 5. Nada beneficioso 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO P12. El video de los drones ha ayudado a la policía de Chula Vista a reducir las tensiones de forma segura y a solucionar situaciones potencialmente peligrosas sin lesionar a los policías, sospechosos y transeúntes. ¿Esto es extremadamente beneficioso, muy beneficioso, algo beneficioso, no tan beneficioso o nada beneficioso para la comunidad? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente beneficioso 2. Muy beneficioso 3. Algo beneficioso 4. No tan beneficioso 5. Nada beneficioso 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 677 of 810 Estas son preocupaciones que algunos residentes han expresado sobre el uso de drones de Chula Vista… [RANDOMIZE Q13-Q14] P13. A algunas personas les preocupa que los drones podrían grabar videos de personas inocentes que no estén involucradas en un crimen o que invadan la privacidad de la gente al f ilmar a los residentes en sus patios traseros o dentro de sus hogares. ¿Usted también está extremadamente preocupado, muy preocupado, algo preocupado, no tan preocupado o nada preocupado respecto a esto? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente preocupado 2. Muy preocupado 3. Algo preocupado 4. No tan preocupado 5. Nada preocupado 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO P14. A algunas personas les preocupa que las grabaciones de las cámaras de los drones se compartirán con otras agencias del orden público y de inmigración que no tengan nada que ver con el incidente original. ¿Usted también está extremadamente preocupado, muy p reocupado, algo preocupado, no tan preocupado o nada preocupado respecto a esto? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente preocupado 2. Muy preocupado 3. Algo preocupado 4. No tan preocupado 5. Nada preocupado 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO P15. El Departamento de Policía no permite que los drones se usen para patrullaje general o para descubrir crímenes nuevos. Solo se pueden usar los drones para responder activamente a emergencias o para cumplir órdenes de cateo emitidas por un juez. Ahora que ha escuchado más sobre el uso de drones por parte del Departamento de Policía de Chula Vista, que implica que la policía lance un dron que proporcione video en vivo desde lo alto de un incidente, ¿aprueba o desaprueba el programa? (PROBE) 1. Apruebo, totalmente 2. Apruebo, algo 3. Desapruebo, algo 4. Desapruebo, totalmente 5. COMBINADO 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER P16. ¿Qué ha visto, leído o escuchado, si acaso, sobre el programa del Lector Automatizado de Matrículas de la Ciudad de Chula Vista? (ACLARAR PARA OBTENER DETALLES, INTRODUCIR RESPUESTA, SI NO ESTÁ SEGURO PREGUNTAR: “¿Está seguro de que no se le viene nada a la mente?”) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 678 of 810 P17. ¿Aprueba o desaprueba el programa del Lector Automatizado de Matrículas de la Ciudad de Chula Vista en el que cámaras computarizadas en cuatro de las 100 patrullas de Chula Vista fotografían automáticamente las matrículas cercanas para que la policía pueda usar esa información para investigar crímenes? (PROBE) 1. Apruebo, totalmente 2. Apruebo, algo 3. Desapruebo, algo 4. Desapruebo, totalmente 5. COMBINADO [SKIP 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER P18. ¿Cuál es la principal razón por la que aprueba/desaprueba el programa? (ACLARAR PARA OBTENER DETALLES, INTRODUCIR RESPUESTA, SI NO ESTÁ SEGURO PREGUNTAR: “¿Está seguro de que no se le viene nada a la mente?”) [ROTATE PRO AND CON BATTERIES AND TRACK] Dígame qué tan beneficioso, si acaso, piensa que son los siguientes aspectos del Lector Automatizado de Matrículas. [RANDOMIZE Q19-Q20] P19. La policía de Chula Vista ha podido localizar personas perdidas usando el programa. ¿Esto es extremadamente beneficioso, muy beneficioso, algo beneficioso, no tan beneficioso o nada beneficioso para la comunidad? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente beneficioso 2. Muy beneficioso 3. Algo beneficioso 4. No tan beneficioso 5. Nada beneficioso 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO P20. La policía de Chula Vista ha usado los datos de las matrículas para investigar y solucionar crímenes violentos y encontrar y arrestar a presuntos delincuentes. ¿Esto es extremadamente beneficioso, muy beneficioso, algo beneficioso, no tan beneficioso o nada beneficioso para la comunidad? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente beneficioso 2. Muy beneficioso 3. Algo beneficioso 4. No tan beneficioso 5. Nada beneficioso 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 679 of 810 Estas son preocupaciones que algunos residentes han expresado sobre el programa del Lector Automatizado de Matrículas de Chula Vista… [RANDOMIZE Q21-Q22] P21. Únicamente alrededor de una de cada 2,000 lecturas de matrículas proporciona una coincidencia de tiempo real para un vehículo sospechoso. Algunas personas dicen que el Departamento de Policía está recopilando los datos de muchos residentes inocentes, creando un sistema masivo de vigilancia. ¿Usted está extremadamente preocupado, muy preocupado, algo preocupado, no tan preocupado o nada preocupado respecto a esto? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente preocupado 2. Muy preocupado 3. Algo preocupado 4. No tan preocupado 5. Nada preocupado 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO P22. A algunas personas les preocupa que la información de las matrículas se compartirá con agencias de inmigración federales que no deberían estar involucradas. ¿Usted está extremadamente preocupado, muy preocupado, algo preocupado, no tan preocupado o na da preocupado respecto a esto? (PROBE) 1. Extremadamente preocupado 2. Muy preocupado 3. Algo preocupado 4. No tan preocupado 5. Nada preocupado 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO P23. La política del Departamento de Policía limita el acceso a los datos de las matrícula s solo al personal policial autorizado que esté investigando crímenes. Los datos de las matrículas tampoco pueden compartirse con ninguna agencia federal. Ahora que ha escuchado más sobre el programa del Lector Automatizado de Matrículas en el que cámaras computarizadas en las patrullas fotografían automáticamente cada matrícula cercana para que la policía pueda usar posteriormente esa información para investigar crímenes, ¿aprueba o desaprueba ese programa? (PROBE) 1. Apruebo, totalmente 2. Apruebo, algo 3. Desapruebo, algo 4. Desapruebo, totalmente 5. COMBINADO 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER Para terminar quedan únicamente dos preguntas demográficas para asegurarnos de que tengamos una muestra representativa… P24. Su origen ético principalmente es… 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 680 of 810 1. Blanco o caucásico 2. Hispano o latino 3. Negro o afroamericano 4. Asiático o isleño del Pacífico 5. Nativo americano 6. Étnicamente mixto u 7. Otro (Especificar) 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER P25. Hágame el favor de indicarme que me detenga cuando llegue a la categoría con el ingreso anual total de su hogar… 1. Menos de $25,000 2. $25 a 40,000 3. $40 a 60,000 4. $60 a 80,000 5. $80 a 100,000 6. $100,000 a $150,000 7. ¿Más de $150,000? 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO 9. SE REHUSÓ A RESPONDER Le agradezco mucho su tiempo y su opinión importa, me despido. BY OBSERVATION 26. GENDER 1. Male 2. Female 27. LANGUAGE 1. English 2. Spanish 3. Tagalog 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 681 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Poll n=600 Chula Vista Residents FINAL Translation note: Items highlighted in yellow do not need to be translated. Kumusta, nariyan po ba si ____? Ako po si _____ mula sa Competitive Edge Research, isang pambansang polling firm at tinatawagan namin ang mabubuting residente ng Chula Vista para hingin ang inyong opinyon sa mga lokal na isyu. Hindi kami nagbebenta ng kung ano. Interesado ang karamihan dito, at ito na ang iyon g pagkakataong iparinig ang iyong boses. Kumpidensiyal ang lahat ng sagot mo. Magsimula na tayo... Q1. Para matulungan kaming mas maintindihan ang iba’t ibang bahagi ng Chula Vista, ano ang iyong ZIP code? (ENTER 5 DIGIT RESPONSE) (IF OUTSIDE CHULA VISTA, TERMINATE) Q2. At sa anong taon ka ipinanganak? (ENTER 4-DIGIT RESPONSE) (IF POST-2004, TERMINATE) Q3. Sa tingin mo ba, nasa tamang direksiyon o nalilihis ng landas ang Chula Vista? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na nasa tamang direksiyon 2. Medyo nasa tamang direksiyon 3. Medyo nasa maling direksiyon 4. Lubos na nasa maling direksiyon 5. HALO 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI Magtatanong kami tungkol sa kaligtasan ng publiko, pagkapribado, at teknolohiya. Para makapagserbisyo, ang mga ahensiya ng pamahalaan, non-profit na organisasyon, at negosyo ay nangangalap ng mga personal na data tulad ng pangalan, petsa ng kapanganakan, at tirahan . Gaano ka kakumpiyansa na pinananatili ng sumusunod na ligtas at pribado ang iyong personal na impormasyon... [RANDOMIZE Q4-Q5] [HALF OF RESPONDENTS GET Q4a, HALF GET Q4b] (PROBE) Ext Very Some Not Not at UNS REF Conf Conf Conf That All Conf Conf Q4a. Pederal na pamahalaan [SPLIT] 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 Q4b. Negosyong online tulad ng Facebook at Amazon [SPLIT] Q5. Lungsod ng Chula Vista 1 Lubhang mataas ang kumpiyansa 2 Mataas ang kumpiyansa 3 Medyo kumpiyansa 4 Hindi gaanong kumpiyansa 5 Walang kumpiyansa 8 DI-TIYAK 9 TUMANGGI 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 682 of 810 Q6. Gaano ka katiwala sa kapulisan ng Chula Vista sa pagpapatupad ng mga polisiyang tumutugon sa mga interes ng publiko? Lubos ba ang tiwala mo sa kanila, medyo lang, hindi gaano, o hindi talaga? (PROBE) 1. Sobra 2. Medyo 3. Hindi gaano 4. Hindi talaga 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI Q7a. Nakakabit ang mga kamera sa ilang poste ng trapiko sa Chula Vista. Ang nakuhang live video ay ipinadadala sa sentro ng pamamahala ng trapiko ng Lungsod . Ginagamit ito ng mga inhinyero para maayos ang timing ng signal ng trapiko para mapabuti ang daloy at kaligtasan ng trapiko. Sumasang-ayon ka ba sa paggamit ng mga kamera sa mga poste ng trapiko sa Lungsod? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na sumasang-ayon 2. Medyo sumasang-ayon 3. Medyo di-sumasang-ayon 4. Lubos na di-sumasang-ayon 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI Q7b. Pinag-iisipan ng Lungsod ng Chula Vista na magpatupad ng bagong polisiya sa proteksiyon ng pagkapribado para gawing transparente at episyente ang paggamit nito ng mga bagong teknolohiya. Gaano kahalaga sa iyo, jung mahalaga man, na magpatupad ng naturang polisiya ang Lungsod? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na mahalaga 2 Napakahalaga 3. Medyo mahalaga 4. Hindi gaanong mahalaga 5. Hindi mahalaga 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI [ROTATE DRONE AND LICENSE PLATE READER BATTERIES AND TRACK] Q8. Ano ang iyong nakita, nabasa, o narinig, kung mayroon man, tungkol sa paggamit ng mga drone sa lungsod ng Chula Vista para sa pagpapatupad ng batas? (CLARIFY FOR SPECIFICS, ENTER RESPONSE, IF UNSURE ASK: “Sigurado ka bang wala kang maisip?”) Q9. Sumasang-ayon ka ba sa paggamit ng Police Department ng Chula Vista ng mga drone, na kinakasangkapan ng mga pulis para kumuha ng live video habang nangyayari ang insidente? (PROBE) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 683 of 810 1. Lubos na sumasang-ayon 2. Medyo sumasang-ayon 3. Medyo di-sumasang-ayon 4. Lubos na di-sumasang-ayon 5. HALO [SKIP TO Q11] 8. DI-TIYAK [SKIP TO Q11] Q10. Ano ang pangunahing dahilan ng iyong pagsang-ayon/di-pagsang-ayon sa programa? (CLARIFY FOR SPECIFICS, ENTER RESPONSE, IF UNSURE ASK: “Sigurado ka bang wala kang maisip?”) [ROTATE PRO AND CON BATTERIES AND TRACK] Pakisabi kung gaano kabenepisyal, kung may benepisyo man, ang sumusunod na mga aspekto ng programa sa drone. [RANDOMIZE Q11-Q12] Q11. Darating ang drone sa eksena ng insidente at magbib igay ng live video sa mga pulis ilang minuto bago dumating ang sasakyan ng pulis. Sa pamamagitan nito, alam ng mga tumutugong opisyal kung ano ang aasahan kapag dumating na sila. Ito ba ay lubos na benepisyal, napakabenepisyal, medyo benepisyal, hindi gaanong benepisyal, o hindi benepisyal sa komunidad? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na benepisyal 2. Napakabenepisyal 3. Medyo benepisyal 4. Hindi gaanong benepisyal 5. Hindi benepisyal 8. DI-TIYAK Q12. Nakatulong ang drone video sa kapulisan ng Chula Vista na ligtas na mapahupa at maresolba ang posibleng mapanganib na mga sitwasyon nang walang nasasaktang pulis, suspek, o miron. Ito ba ay lubos na benepisyal, napakabenepisyal, medyo benepisyal, hindi gaanong benepisyal, o hindi benepisyal sa komunidad? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na benepisyal 2. Napakabenepisyal 3. Medyo benepisyal 4. Hindi gaanong benepisyal 5. Hindi benepisyal 8. DI-TIYAK Ito ang mga alalahaning ipinahayag ng ilang residente kaugnay sa paggamit ng drone ng Chula Vista... [RANDOMIZE Q13-Q14] Q13. Nag-aalala ang ilang residente na baka marekord ng mga drone ang video ng mga inosenteng tao na hindi naman sangkot sa krimen o baka malabag ang pagkapribado kapag nakunan ang mga residente sa kanilang bakuran o loob ng bahay. Ikaw ba ay lubos na nag-aalala, nag-aalala, medyo nag-aalala, hindi gaanong nag-aalala, o hindi nag-aalala tungkol dito? (PROBE) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 684 of 810 1. Lubos na nag-aalala 2. Nag-aalala 3. Medyo nag-aalala 4. Hindi gaanong nag-aalala 5. Hindi nag-aalala 8. DI-TIYAK Q14. Nag-aalala ang ilang residente na baka ibahagi sa ibang mga ahensiya ng pagpapatupad ng batas at imigrasyon ang mga nakuha ng kamera ng mga drone na wala namang kinalaman sa orihinal na insidente. Ikaw rin ba ay lubos na nag-aalala, nag-aalala, medyo nag-aalala, hindi gaanong nag-aalala, o hindi nag-aalala tungkol dito? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na nag-aalala 2. Nag-aalala 3. Medyo nag-aalala 4. Hindi gaanong nag-aalala 5. Hindi nag-aalala 8. DI-TIYAK Q15. Hindi pinahihintulutan ng Police Department ang paggamit ng mga drone sa mga karaniwang pagpapatrol o pagtuklas ng mga bagong krimen. Magagamit lang ang mga drone para aktibong tumugon sa mga emerhensiya o maghain ng mga search warant na nilagdaan ng hukom. Ngayong mas nalinaw na sa iyo ang paggamit ng mga drone ng Police Department ng Chula Vista, para kumuha ng live video habang nangyayari ang insidente, sumasang-ayon ka ba sa programa? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na sumasang-ayon 2. Medyo sumasang-ayon 3. Medyo di-sumasang-ayon 4. Lubos na di-sumasang-ayon 5. HALO 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI Q16. Ano ang iyong nakita, nabasa, o narinig, kung mayroon man, tungkol sa programang Automated License Plate Reader ng lungsod Chula Vista? (CLARIFY FOR SPECIFICS, ENTER RESPONSE, IF UNSURE ASK: “Sigurado ka bang wala kang maisip?”) Q17. Sumasang-ayon ka ba sa programang Automated License Plate Reader ng lungsod ng Chula Vista kung saan awtomatikong kukuhanan ng larawan ng mga computerized na kamera sa apat sa 100 sasakyan ng pulis ng Chula Vista ang kalapit na mga plaka ng lisensiya para magamit kalaunan ng mga pulis ang impormasyon sa imbestigasyon ng mga krimen? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na sumasang-ayon 2. Medyo sumasang-ayon 3. Medyo di-sumasang-ayon 4. Lubos na di-sumasang-ayon 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 685 of 810 5. HALO [SKIP] 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI Q18. Ano ang pangunahing dahilan ng iyong pagsang-ayon/di-pagsang-ayon sa programa? (CLARIFY FOR SPECIFICS, ENTER RESPONSE, IF UNSURE ASK: “Sigurado ka bang wala kang maisip?”) [ROTATE PRO AND CON BATTERIES AND TRACK] Pakisabi kung gaano kabenepisyal, kung may benepisyo man, ang sumusunod na mga aspekto ng programa sa Automated License Plate Reader. [RANDOMIZE Q19-Q20] Q19. Natutukoy ng kapulisan ng Chula Vista ang kinaroroonan ng mga mawawalang tao gamit ang programa. Ito ba ay lubos na benepisyal, napakabenepisyal, medyo benepisyal, hindi gaanong benepisyal, o hindi benepisyal sa komunidad? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na benepisyal 2. Napakabenepisyal 3. Medyo benepisyal 4. Hindi gaanong benepisyal 5. Hindi benepisyal 8. DI-TIYAK Q20. Ginagamit ng kapulisan ng Chula Vista ang data ng plaka ng lisensiya para imbestigahan at lutasin ang mararahas na krimen at tugisin at arestuhin ang mga kriminal na suspek. Ito ba ay lubos na benepisyal, napakabenepisyal, medyo benepisyal, hindi gaanong benepisyal, o hindi benepisyal sa komunidad? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na benepisyal 2. Napakabenepisyal 3. Medyo benepisyal 4. Hindi gaanong benepisyal 5. Hindi benepisyal 8. DI-TIYAK Ito ang mga alalahaning ipinahayag ng ilang residente kaugnay sa programang Automated License Plate Reader ng Chula Vista...[RANDOMIZE Q21-Q22] Q21. Tinatayang isa lang sa 2,000 pagbasa ng plaka ng lisensiya ang nagbibigay ng real-time na match sa isang kahina-hinalang sasakyan. Sinasabi ng ilang tao na nairerekord ng Police Department ang data ng napakaraming inosenteng residente, na lumilikha ng isang sistema ng malawakang pagmamanman. Ikaw ba ay lubos na nag-aalala, nag-aalala, medyo nag-aalala, hindi gaanong nag-aalala, o hindi nag-aalala tungkol dito? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na nag-aalala 2. Nag-aalala 3. Medyo nag-aalala 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 686 of 810 4. Hindi gaanong nag-aalala 5. Hindi nag-aalala 8. DI-TIYAK Q22. Nag-aalala ang ilang residente na baka ibahagi ang impormasyon sa plaka ng lisensiya sa hindi naman dapat sangkot na mga pederal na ahensiya ng imigrasyon. Ikaw ba ay lubos na nag- aalala, nag-aalala, medyo nag-aalala, hindi gaanong nag-aalala, o hindi nag-aalala tungkol dito? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na nag-aalala 2. Nag-aalala 3. Medyo nag-aalala 4. Hindi gaanong nag-aalala 5. Hindi nag-aalala 8. DI-TIYAK Q23. Sa polisiya ng Police Department, limitado ang akses sa data ng plaka ng lisensiya sa mga awtorisadong kawani ng kapulisan na nag-iimbestiga ng mga krimen. Hindi maaaring ibahagi ang data na ito sa ano mang mga pederal na ahensiya. Ngayong mas nalinaw na sa iyo ang programang Automated License Plate Reader, kung saan awtomatikong kukuhanan ng larawan ng mga computerized na kamera sa mga sasakyan ng pulis ang bawat kalapit na plaka ng lisensiya para magamit kalaunan sa imbestigasyon ng mga krimen, sumasang-ayon ka ba sa programang ito? (PROBE) 1. Lubos na sumasang-ayon 2. Medyo sumasang-ayon 3. Medyo di-sumasang-ayon 4. Lubos na di-sumasang-ayon 5. HALO 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI May dalawang tanong na lang ako para matiyak na representatibo ang sample... Q24. Ang pangunahin mo bang lahing etniko ay… 1. Puti o Caucasian 2. Hispaniko o Latino 3. Itim o Aprikano Amerikano 4. Asyano o Taga-isla ng Pasipiko 5. Katutubong Amerikano 6. Magkahalong lahi o 7. Iba pa? (TUKUYIN) 9. TUMANGGI Q25. Patigilin mo ako kapag naabot ko na ang saklaw ng kabuuang taunang kita ng inyong sambahayan… 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 687 of 810 1. Mababa sa $25,000 2. $25,000 hanggang $40,000 3. $40,000 hanggang $60,000 4. $60,000 hanggang $80,000 5. $80,000 hanggang $100,000 6. $100,000 hanggang $150,000 7. Mahigit $150,000? 8. DI-TIYAK 9. TUMANGGI Salamat sa iyong oras. Mahalaga ang iyong opinyon. Hanggang sa muli. BY OBSERVATION 26. GENDER 1. Male 2. Female 27. LANGUAGE 1. English 2. Spanish 3. Tagalog 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 688 of 810 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Madaffer and Jeremy Ogul, Madaffer Enterprises FROM: John Nienstedt and Rachel Lawler RE: Chula Vista Privacy Focus Group Research – Full Report DATE: Friday, July 29, 2022 INTRODUCTION The City of Chula Vista, home to more than 265,000 residents, is San Diego County’s second-largest city. It is currently considering implementing new privacy policies to better protect residents’ personal information, while also striving for more transparency around its data collection practices. The City of Chula Vista Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force, a group of Chula Vista residents and subject matter experts, was formed. It will help develop comprehensive policy recommendations on technology oversight and privacy for City Council review by the fall of 2022. The City retained Madaffer Enterprises to assist the Task Force. In turn, Madaffer hired Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. (CERC) to conduct research in two phases. The quantitative survey phase is complete and is now being followed by focus groups to gain a deeper understanding of resident concerns and preferences that emerged in the survey. After conducting four focus groups in English, the City decided to conduct two additional groups with Spanish-speaking residents. Together, these pieces of research will provide valuable information addressing residents’ privacy concerns as well as informing the development of thorough, effective, and broadly accepted City privacy policies. Focus group research explores the rationales for opinions and attitudes; it does not infer from measured data to the larger population. The richness of this research method comes from observing how people react to stimuli, in hearing them talk, and observing how they formulate their opinions. The proceedings are context-based and not statistically projectable to the views of an entire group of people. The ongoing health concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic made it necessary to hold the sessions online instead of in-person. We recruited and validated participants for full groups of six to eight. Participants were also screened for articulation. Eight qualified participants were seated in Groups 1 and 2, seven were seated in Group 3 and although eight were initially seated in Group 4, one participant chose to leave the group after several minutes. Eight participants were seated in Group 5 and seven were seated in Group 6, though one participant in each group chose to leave during the session. The English-language groups were moderated by John Nienstedt, a professional moderator and pollster. The Spanish-language groups were moderated by Cris Bain-Borrego, a bilingual professional moderator skilled in conducting groups with Latinos. The discussion guide was principally designed by Nienstedt, Jim Madaffer and Jeremy Ogul of Madaffer Enterprises, with input from the Task Force. It was also reviewed by City staff. Bain-Borrego translated all materials necessary for the Spanish groups. • Groups 1: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing less than a “very good” job at keeping personal information private • Group 2: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing better than a “very bad” job at keeping personal information private 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 689 of 810 2 • Group 3: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing a “good” job at keeping personal information private or are unsure about that • Group 4: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing a “bad” job at keeping personal information private or are unsure about that • Group 5: Chula Vista Spanish-speaking residents who think the City is not doing a “bad” job at keeping personal information private • Group 6: Chula Vista Spanish-speaking residents who think the City is not doing a “good” job at keeping personal information private The table below highlights select participant demographics. Groups 1, 2, and 5 were balanced by gender, while Groups 3 and 4 tilted slightly more female; Group 6 contained only 1 male. Ages of participants in all groups skewed toward middle-aged or younger. Also, majorities in all six groups were ethnically non-White. GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 GROUP 6 TOTAL Male 4 4 3 3 3 1 18 Female 4 4 4 4 4 5 25 White 3 1 1 1 0 0 6 Non-White 5 7 6 6 7 6 37 18-34 2 3 4 3 0 1 13 35-54 6 3 1 2 5 5 22 55+ 0 2 2 2 2 0 8 OBJECTIVES These focus groups are designed to: • Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government • Develop suggestions for privacy policies EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Housing affordability, crime and public safety, and homelessness are the top issues residents feel local officials should be most focused on. Privacy issues were not mentioned, so they are not top of mind in the community. • Knowledge of privacy issues looks to be limited to drones and automated license plate readers. However, most residents do not intuitively link either of these programs to confidentiality concerns. • Across all our groups, “no news is good news” is the prevailing attitude when it comes to whether the City’s privacy and confidentiality polices are working or not. Absent a significant public data breach, residents will assume Chula Vista takes the necessary steps to secure their personal data. • Only two participants experienced a serious data breach or invasion of privacy – in this case, identity theft. Consequently, participants currently do not show widespread urgency around privacy issues. • An overall lack of awareness about how Chula Vista handles sensitive data is evident. • Only one participant across all six groups claimed to be formally involved with Chula Vista’s boards and commissions. Almost none expressed a desire to sign up. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 690 of 810 3 • Most felt the City of Chula Vista does not effectively communicate with residents about civic engagement opportunities. Emails and social media posts on community pages were the most popular suggestions for increasing involvement and essentially amounted to “do a better job getting the word out about privacy issues.” • Spanish language participants voiced a desire for local officials to get out into the Latino community more as a way to draw attention to privacy issues and policies. • Spanish language participants were generally remarkably similar in their perspectives, desires, and tone to English language participants. Notable exceptions: o Word-of-mouth appears to be a more important source for local information o Spam calls are seen as invasion of privacy o More focus on punishing bad actors who violate privacy rules o More focus on the City getting consent from residents who share their information or whose images are captured on video • There was lack of consensus on whether certain ethnic groups are singled out by Chula Vista law enforcement. Some rejected that notion while others told vivid stories regarding instances when they felt profiling occurred. • On their own, participants surfaced many ideas on what the City could do to address privacy issues • The policies adopted by Seattle (posting privacy rules and regulations on the City’s website) and Oakland (its privacy advisory board) were generally applauded. However, Berkeley’s banning of facial recognition technology was very controversial. While some participants saw the virtue of a ban, more felt that went too far and would not help Chula Vista deal effectively with crime. • Top policy prescriptions (in order of popularity): 1. Chief Privacy Officer 2. Enhanced Training 3. A Privacy Oversight Board 4. More City Council Oversight of Privacy-relate Expenditures 5. Anonymizing Data • Mid-level policy prescriptions: 6. Data Sharing with 3rd Parties (law enforcement “yes,” commercial entities “no” 7. Minimizing Data Collection 8. Regular Audits 9. Time Limits on Data Retention • Unpopular policy prescription 10. Equitable Deployment of Technology OBSERVATIONS John and Cris began the groups with a warm-up exercise by asking everyone to introduce themselves and share where they get their local news about their community. Most participants are longtime Chula Vista residents, averaging nearly two decades in the city. Although there were a few newer arrivals, most have been in the area for more than 10 years and several natives reported moving back to Chula Vista after living elsewhere. News sources varied across online, social media, print, word of mouth, television, and radio platforms. Most participants mentioned watching local TV news. The most popular stations were the local affiliate stations of NBC Channel 7 (x9), CBS Channel 8 (x7), FOX Channel 5 (x6), and ABC Channel 10 (x5); independent KUSI (x3) and local public TV station KPBS (x1) were also mentioned. Online sources like Google or Apple newsfeeds (x8) were very common, with social media sites Facebook (x12), YouTube 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 691 of 810 4 (x4), and Nextdoor (x4) being used frequently. Other social media mentioned included (Instagram (x3), Reddit (x1), and Twitter (x1). Newspapers were used by only a few participants (either print or online), and mentions were evenly split between the Union Tribute (x2) and The Star News (x2). Radio stations (x4) in general were also less widespread, while one person said they tuned into NPR. Five people told us they get their local news by word of mouth from family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues. Within the Spanish groups there was a heavy reliance on online and social media sources (Facebook, Instagram, and Whats App groups), as well as on-line parent groups. Word of mouth was also popular, and many got their local information from family. South Bay Community Services came up three times as a source; not a surprise because at least three participants were promotoras from that organization. TV was also part of the overall mix, with FOX mentioned a few times, NBC cited a couple times and KUSI mentioned once. ISSUES Participants were then asked to voice the top issues they feel local officials should be most focused on. Once we tallied the results, it’s apparent Chula Vista generally has three key areas residents are most concerned about: housing affordability, crime and public safety, and homelessness. Housing affordability tops the list with the most mentions. Although the issue dominated the conversation in almost every group, it was notably absent from Group 3 whose concerns were more varied. Many elevating this issue shared impassioned views about how the difficult housing market impacts them personally. The interlinked issues of crime and public safety and homelessness tie for the runner-up spots on the list. Both were brought up in all six groups, so these are widespread affecting Latino and non-Latino community. One participant reported experiencing or hearing about a lot of property crimes in his area of Chula Vista, saying there are “break-ins and porch pirates” and the police “aren’t investigating very often.” Another said he has seen “lots of drug use” on the westside. A spike in similar occurrences near where one woman lives made her want to see “more police presence,” while another woman questioned whether there are “enough law enforcement officers to handle Chula Vista’s growth.” Homelessness is closely tied to a perceived rise in crime – “homelessness brings crime increases” – but residents are also worried about other aspects such as a lack of homelessness programs and the visual stain it leaves on the community. Women tended to focus on homelessness more often. As one woman emphatically stated, “everywhere I go there’s always homeless people – the parks, streets, fast food places, supermarkets, restaurants…they need more programs or to improve the ones they have” while Jodi remarked that she would like to see “more help with mental health and homelessness.” Another’s concerns focused on local schools: “Homelessness around the elementary schools – there’s needles and trash, and teachers and students are not feeling secure at school, it’s really growing.” Based on our discussions, concerns about homelessness seem to permeate all corners of the City, but especially the westside. Schools, business development, infrastructure, visual blight, the cost of living, and environmental issues were other issues named by more than one person but are much less pervasive than the top three issues mentioned. No one mentioned privacy issues, so it is not top of mind in the community. Even those in Groups 4 and 6 who are not upbeat about the City managing personal information did not mention privacy during the 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 692 of 810 5 discussion of important issues. Amid a plethora of issues that impact everyday life – inflation, record- high gas prices, homelessness, housing, and spiking crime – privacy concerns are not front and center. When John and Cris probed on the issue, it was clear folks want their data to be secure and residents will welcome new or updated privacy policies designed to protect them and their personal data, but they aren’t clamoring for it. However, sentiment could swiftly change if the City of Chula Vista were to experience a serious data breach. KNOWLEDGE OF PRIVACY ISSUES Next, the moderators asked whether anyone has been exposed to privacy issues related to the City and whether they have knowledge of specific steps or measures the City has taken to keep personal information confidential. A female in Group 2 remembered hearing about the Chula Vista Police Department being hacked in 2020 in which some personal information was leaked, but no one else could recall specific data leaks from the City. Only a few people were able to identify any steps Chula Vista has taken to keep data safe. No one in the Spanish-language groups was aware of any specific measures intended to keep personal information secure. In fact, most participants were initially slow to acknowledge the importance of privacy as an issue when asked about it directly. One Latina said, “you’ve got to say to people, ‘hey, did you know that [privacy issue]…?’ Only then will people know there’s a potential problem.” To the minimal extent that other residents are cognizant of privacy issues, this knowledge looks to be limited to drones and automated license plate readers. Drones Only two participants mentioned the Chula Vista Police Department’s drones, unprompted, in connection with residents’ privacy and confidentiality. A highly talkative and informed Group 1 participant was the only one who spontaneously recalled anything: “I read something about that. The police have large drones that they fly to almost every call. They are recording every time they are flying. An advocacy group got involved and want to know how they are protecting the data they collect.” This summary spurred recollection for everyone in Group 1. In Group 3, a Chula Vista native and highly engaged participant was the only other person to spontaneously mention anything about the drones saying, “The police radio scanner has been encrypted. They also now have a drone which is receiving a lot of criticism because people say it impacts their privacy, but it’s only used in certain cases.” Once prompted, five of the eight Group 2 members also expressed familiarity with the police drones, although this only happened to one participant each in Groups 3 and 4. Two panelists recalled hearing drones near their homes but assumed they were private aircraft unrelated to law enforcement efforts. Most participants only connected the drones to personal privacy once they are asked about it directly. Even a male participant who lives “close to the police station” where there is “a high level of drone traffic” did not instinctively connect the dots between the two. There is very little evidence suggesting residents are frequently and intuitively equating drones to an invasion of privacy or confidentiality concerns. Automated License Plate Readers Automated license plate readers are another aspect of the privacy issue that most participants in the groups were aware of but do not instinctively link to confidentiality. A lot of folks admitted to knowing about them once asked by John or Cris, and their privacy worries focused on possible errors resulting from cameras doing the job of law enforcement officers as well as their potential misuse by police. As one man put it, “I don’t think it’s appropriate for law enforcement to start running people’s info without a reason.” There was also some confusion in Group 4 about exactly what these cameras are, as three 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 693 of 810 6 commented about the cameras on the SR-125 toll road. They tended to focus on the need for automated plate readers due to the toll requirement, not to fight crime or ensure public safety, so linking “cameras” to law enforcement is not top-of-mind for these participants. That said, automated license plate cameras generally don’t sit well with some participants, with one commenting, “I get the intent behind the license plate scanners, but it is a bit invasive to scan everyone.” However, their anxiety tends to stem from the potential for data to be misused by law enforcement agencies for unrelated incidents and crimes, rather than the prospect that it will find its way into nefarious hands. Although some don’t love the cameras, many also acknowledged their good crimefighting intent. Are the City’s Confidentiality Policies Working? When it comes to whether the City’s policies designed to keep personal information confidential are working, most couldn’t give a firm “yes” or “no” answer. Instead, the prevailing sentiment was “in the absence of news to the contrary – citizens’ privacy is not being undermined.” Although some participants were more hesitant than others to completely trust that their information is safe, this attitude dominated all six groups. One woman embodied this belief, saying, “I think you just assume the City is keeping your information secure. It’s not something I give a second thought to,” while another echoed, “I assume it’s working. I trust that they do but maybe I’m being gullible.” For Chula Vistans, “no news is good news” when it comes to their personal data being kept secure. One of the less-trusting participants remarked, “I don’t trust that any of our information is completely private. I highly doubt it will be completely private. I’m not confident with some of the leadership in Chula Vista. I don’t know how tech savvy they are.” However, because most participants weren’t aware of any City data breaches, lack of faith was limited. Absent a major public breach, it’s likely most residents will continue assuming Chula Vista takes the necessary precautions to protect their personal data. On the other hand, should a breach occur, residents will quickly lose confidence in the City’s ability to protect sensitive information. Experiences with Data Breaches Part of the current lack of urgency around privacy issues can be attributed to most participants not having any personal experience with serious data breaches or invasions of privacy. In total, about half the participants reported experiencing some type of breach or privacy violation, but only two people had serious personal incidents. The most common of the lesser offenses that were mentioned include credit card fraud, theft of mail or personal documents, email or cell phone data breaches, and personal information being used for marketing purposes without consent. These events were very common and came up in all six groups. One also recalled an experience where a drone – which he did not identify as belonging to law enforcement or a private citizen – hovered near his girlfriend’s house and pointed a camera toward her windows for roughly 15 minutes which he deemed “a huge invasion of privacy.” His story drew sympathetic nods from the group, but he was the only one to mention this type of occurrence. Although unpleasant, most of these can be considered ordinary hassles that most people will face at some point in their life and people tend to “come out relatively unscathed.” The same cannot be said, however, for two women who had their identities stolen (it should be noted that two Group 4 participants also confirmed close family members had their identities stolen, although the participants themselves were not victims). Both detailed a life-altering experience with one describing how the thieves “took my social security number and withdrew from my retirement. Now I have more worry with that type of invasion – that’s your whole life. It impacts everything. I had to close 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 694 of 810 7 bank accounts every time I opened them.” One participant’s personal information was hacked through an employer payroll data breach that “resulted in identity theft that took quite a long time to fix. My employer outsourced payroll and after this happened, they brought it in-house. It caused tremendous anxiety. They wiped out my checking and savings accounts. I had to open new accounts at a new bank. I still have a lot of anxiety knowing I’m on the dark web – they have my social security number and date of birth.” Unlike the summaries given by those who suffered through less severe violations, it was clear these egregious infringements are still taking both tangible and intangible tolls on the two women in question. People are used to dealing with minor episodes of credit card theft and unsolicited advertising, but identity theft is a whole different kettle of fish. While smaller hacks will certainly erode resident trust, the fallout would not be nearly as dire as if identities were stolen because of a breach of City data. Evaluations of City Efforts to Keep Personal Information Confidential In the next exercise, John and Cris asked participants to evaluate how well the City of Chula Vista is doing in keeping certain types of personal information confidential. Voluntary Information When it comes to the City keeping information that is voluntarily given to it confidential – such as the payment of parking fines, dog licenses, and recreation class sign ups – most participants have no idea whether Chula Vista is doing a good or bad job. The rationale among the few folks who had a positive opinion mostly hinged – once again – on the idea of “no news is good news” with one commenting, “I haven’t heard about anything on the news, and I have read about other breaches from companies like T Mobile. So, I feel like I would have heard about it if it happened with the City.” Another Spanish-speaking participant said that because she isn’t aware of any breaches, the City is most likely “using the information it collects with good intentions and with the purpose for which it was intended to be used.” A few people did explain that they had positive personal experiences. One related that she has “applied for classes and not had my information used for anything nefarious,” but these tangible proof points of the City doing a good job with this type of data were few and far between. No one voiced solidly negative reviews, but the bulk of positive and neutral opinions were based on assumptions. Involuntary Information On the other hand, reactions to whether the City is doing a good or bad job keeping involuntarily given information private – such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles –were much more of a mixed bag. Groups 1 and 4 – where a majority felt Chula Vista is doing a bad job – were mostly critical. The very nature of information being taken from people without their knowledge or consent evidently breeds more hostile views from the get-go. Rationales for negative views tended to fall into four buckets, the first being concerns about the City staffs’ technological prowess. One woman recalled from her personal experience working for the police department that “the tech support they have is not always up to date to keep security in place and things can get leaked or end up in another database – I’ve seen that in personal experience. They have information you aren’t aware they are collecting so you don’t even know to ask if they are collecting it.” Another echoed this sentiment saying, “older generations don’t have as much understanding of tech and that could lead to something being vulnerable.” 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 695 of 810 8 A lack of transparency was another cause for concern. A retired park ranger for the City of San Diego explained, “there is quite a bit of info the public doesn’t know we gather; they would be surprised. If something went wrong, they would never know.” Another woman was dismayed because residents “don’t know where data is stored. If it is stored elsewhere (off site) that should be public knowledge,” while one woman articulated, “although we don’t hear anything, but we don’t know what we don’t know. The biggest thing is a lack of transparency in what they do with their data or how they are updating their systems. You never hear about that – you hear about it from other companies, but never Chula Vista.” Several participants were also worried about this type of data being used for “bad motives” outside of its intended purpose. When probed further, “bad motives” can be described as using or selling confidential data – two panelists adamantly believed private data is being sold by the City – for targeted advertising, immigration enforcement, vehicle speed traps, or political targeting – ala “IRS targeting of political dissidents.” Using private data for essentially anything outside of its original intent is unacceptable to these participants. However, many folks in this category also acknowledged there are good motives for capturing and recording involuntary data, so they don’t have a purely pessimistic outlook. “Good motives” that were mentioned include Amber Alerts, tracking and locating criminals, monitoring pedestrian and traffic patterns, and their ability to help prevent vehicle accidents. Finally, the assumption rationale comes into play again. Although they have no concrete evidence, a few people assume the City is not doing a good job keeping this type of data safe. For example, one stated, “I have no reason to believe it’s being used inappropriately. But I know when humans have access to data, there is potential for misuse. But I have nothing to base my opinion on.” Another extrapolated from a past unrelated experience saying, “I don’t trust anyone because my information has been stolen by someone I was very close with.” On the other end of the spectrum, majorities in Groups 2, 3, 5, and even 6 felt positively – or at the very least, indifferent – about City keeping involuntary information confidential. But again, these views are usually based on assumptions that a good job was being done because they hadn’t been notified of any misuse or breach of private data. One summed up this mentality nicely saying, “I think they are doing OK, but we don’t know for sure if they have been breached.” Only a few of the rationales were based on concrete examples, and these were limited to two Spanish speakers in Groups 5 and 6 who happily cited personal experiences whereby crimes were resolved thanks to license plate scanners and video camera images that proved their innocence. Video Imagery Next, John and Cris posed the same question about video imagery and data – such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras, and many participants were upbeat about the City’s efforts with this data. One believes the City does a good job saying, “it’s almost impossible to view any of the footage from city cameras; it takes a court order.” Two participants recalled their personal conversations with law enforcement personnel that left them with the impression that this type of data is treated with integrity and is heavily guarded and very secure. A few participants parroted the same “no news is good news” trope – so again, some opinions are based heavily on assumptions. Group 5 was perhaps the most positive, initially. One man said the police are using the video for the reason intended and none think the video surveillance is more targeted at Latinos. As the discussion went on, one woman joked about surveillance, offering, “what if I was cheating on my husband and they had video of that?” That brought laughs but led to one participant commenting that “everything is already public, just don't add 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 696 of 810 9 to the problem by releasing my private info.” Group 5 hadn’t been thinking much about privacy, but then once they talked about it, they began to see the possibilities of abuse, ala “now that you mention it." A large share of participants – including majorities in Groups 4 and 6 – didn’t initially have much to say about the video images. Group 4 members largely felt their knowledge about the confidentiality practices was insufficient to make a judgement. Conversely, some in Group 6 said it’s fine as long as Chula Vista was “controlling it.” Another commented that “it cuts both ways” in that they value the law enforcement aspects, but also see how drones and body cameras could be abused. One offered that he has heard about drone footage on the Internet: “Chula Vista stores videos and then the video is gone… it's kinda strange, because the video isn't then used to hold people accountable.” This then prompted a discussion that clearly revealed some distrust of the police. One said, “police use it [video] to protect themselves. They only release the video to prove they didn't do anything wrong,” and that elicited nods from around the screen. All except Bryan felt police might be manipulating the information to their favor: “they [police] use it [video] to their benefit.” These suspicions seemed natural for a group comprised of participants who do not think the City is protecting data well, in general. Only two participants surfaced overtly distrustful views, saying, “Even though they haven’t been released to public, personnel in city can share it. They can take a picture with their cell phone and share it – I’ve seen it done,” and people have “no idea what info is taken, where it goes, etc.…you just do not know.” An overall lack of awareness about how Chula Vista handles sensitive data was evinced. Even those who think it does a good job are relying on the flimsy “no news is good news” rationale. The moment any news comes out about a video breach and leak, residents will become seriously concerned. Singling Out of Certain Groups Because “Chula Vista has a lot of diversity,” hardly anyone in Groups 1 or 2 felt certain groups are singled out more than they should be by police. Among the few who thought this does happen, the more common belief was that this happens to homeless people or people with mental health issues rather than people of a certain race or ethnicity. Only one participant mentioned that Latinos are targeted more than others, saying she had seen “DUI checkpoints that turn out to be checkpoints for legal status, registration checks, etc. They primarily target Hispanic people so they can check their immigration status.” More prevalent – though still only voiced by a couple of participants – was the idea that the police aren’t targeting the bad guys or following up on crime enough. Although a Latino in Group 3 agreed that Chula Vista is a “mixed pot of people,” participants in Groups 3 and 4 were much more likely to think certain groups are singled out by the police. African Americans and Latinos were the primary targets mentioned, although Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders and homeless individuals also came up. One White woman in Group 4 told a poignant story in this regard. She described how she – despite having two motorcycle cops behind her – was not stopped when she had 13 kids in her car and then told us her husband, who is a Pacific Islander with a goatee, was pulled over for minor and unobvious infractions. In the first of the two Spanish sessions, the drone section led to a fascinating discussion of whether Chula Vista police are singling out groups. The less skeptical Group 5 didn’t focus on ethnicity, they perceived it was a “look” that got unwarranted attention from the police. One said that the police “focus on tattoos and people who are not clean cut rather than the guy in the suit.” Another backed that up saying he’ll “see the police cars around the tattooed guy and interrogating him.” Only one participant 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 697 of 810 10 mentioned multiple police cars patrolling Latino neighborhoods, but no other heads nodded at that point. Another panelist thought she was targeted but that was in San Diego, raising the prospect of residents conflating issues across agencies and municipalities. In sum, only two of the seven in Group 5 thought ethnic/racial targeting was occurring. It was a different story in the more critical Group 6. One Latina felt there's more patrols now that there are more Mexicans and people of color in her neighborhood. Another participant believed there's a lot of force being used against certain ethnic groups. One participant’s Mexican brother, who has darker skin than she does, was stopped because, they said, he fit the physical appearance, so they interrogated him. This vivid memory did not sit right with the sister. This brought us back to the drones. A young Latina in Group 6 felt the drones are singling out Latinos. She claimed 90% are Latino in her area, “and you see a lot of police activity.” Police-worn body cameras again came in for criticism, and some felt video might catch bad police behavior more often, “but police can turn on and off the body cams” when they feel like it and the group felt that’s not right. Only one Group 6 participant, who essentially opined that the police aren't really singling out Latinos – “there's just more Latinos in Chula Vista” – didn’t think racial targeting is going on. Ideation John and Cris followed this up by asking participants what should be done to keep these three types of information safe and private. As part of an “easel exercise,” they shared their screen and typed participants’ suggestions into three separate lists. Keeping Personal Information That You Give the City Private Suggestions for keeping voluntary information private tended to fall into three buckets: technology upgrades, explicit policies about data access, and personnel roles and responsibilities. Importantly, even though John and Cris emphasized that the suggestions – at this point – were specifically for voluntary information, the participants generally did not differentiate their ideas based on the type of data being captured. Instead, they made suggestions that can apply to any kind of data the City holds, with the exception of the “opt out” option which can realistically only be applied to voluntarily given information. (Note that suggestions appearing across multiple categories are marked with an *asterisk and should be considered priority items.) Data Access and Usage Policies Most suggestions fall under this umbrella, and every group proposed at least one idea in this category. Suggestions that the City of Chula Vista may want to consider include: • *Increase transparency through disclosure of all data Chula Vista has, where it is stored, who has access to it, and who it is shared with. A version of this recommendation came up in all six groups and was easily the most frequent answer given. Transparency was one of the most common themes throughout the groups. Participants also indicated they would like this information to be easily available to the public and suggested the City website and community social media pages as potential mediums. One participant provided an example of how she would like this information laid out saying, “when we collect xx, we keep it for xx amount of time and then we do xx with your personal data.” 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 698 of 810 11 • *Establish data expiry dates and deleting extraneous data. This popular suggestion was cited in multiple groups. Although proposals for the appropriate storage length varied from days to years, the intent was clear: Chula Vista should not hold personal data in perpetuity. Deleting superfluous data – even that which is done before the data expiry date – is another related aspect residents would like to see come to fruition. This was an especially potent idea among the folks who generally distrusted the City’s data practices. • *Ban data sales to third parties. The City may already have a ban in place, but some residents still believe their personal data is being sold. If the City does sell data, residents will not tolerate that. Participants were clear this ban should not apply to sharing information with other law enforcement agencies for the purposes of solving crimes, locating missing people or fugitives, etc. However, they are opposed to this information being used for the purposes of looking for crime or immigration status checks. • Allow residents to “opt out.” Having an “opt out” option for information voluntarily submitted to the City was another suggestion that came up in several of the sessions. This option would allow residents to dictate whether or not the City could store their personal information. Not only would this increase transparency, but it would also give residents more control over their personal information. Implementing privacy agreements, allowing individuals to access the personal data the City holds on them, and applying stringent access permission standards also came up – and may be worth considering – but were each only mentioned by one group. Technology Upgrades Upgrades to existing technology are, perhaps, one of the most tangible and logical changes suggested. This category earned mentions from every group except Group 6. Suggestions that the Task Force may want to consider include: • Implement two-step (multi-factor) verification for anyone trying to access data files. Multi- factor authentication is defined as “an electronic authentication method in which a user is granted access to a file, website, or application only after successfully presenting two or more pieces of evidence to an authentication mechanism: knowledge, possession, and inherence.” This is fast becoming the norm for accessing sensitive data. Entities not using this technology may soon be seen as more vulnerable to hacks. • *Better file encryption. Details from the four groups who suggested this were light – after all, most are not coders or IT professionals. However, there was a strong desire that the City use comprehensive and modern encryption methods when collecting personal data, if it doesn’t already do so. Storing confidential data on standalone networks like the military’s SIPPER and NIPPER networks and controlling access to data through chip-encrypted ID cards were both brought up in Group 1. Personnel Roles and Responsibilities Changes to City personnel roles and responsibilities received fewer mentions overall. • *Increase cyber security resources in the form of additional staff members. Alternatively, creating a role specifically to protect confidential information – such as a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) – and answer for data breaches and leaks came up in two of the groups. An increasing number of companies and municipalities are employing CPOs. A related suggestion was to 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 699 of 810 12 require any City employee who deals with personally identifiable information be licensed to do so. • *Hold “best practices” training for employees who handle sensitive data. Participants who brought this up were adamant such training be kept current and required on an annual or biennial basis. • *Hold staff accountable for privacy violations. Ensuring that the consequences for violations are well known to staff, and then carrying out the specified punishments when breaches occur was more popular in the Latino groups. Gathering community feedback prior to contracting with companies that collect and store data as well as having an *independent agency review and audit privacy protocols were suggestions that did not fit into any of the three categories and received one mention each. Keeping Personal Information That the City Collects Private Recommendations for keeping involuntary information private were sparser, and it was clear that participants struggled to come up with recommendations because most of their key ideas were already captured in the previous category. Ideas that came up again and overlap with the voluntary data category include strict access protocols, data expiration dates, greater transparency around collection practices, increased accountability for data misuse, better digital security programs, more staff in cyber security roles, conducting independent audits, and holding regular employee trainings. Suggestions that are unique to the involuntary information category include: • Keep two databases. One database would house voluntary information given to the city, while the other would house involuntary information which would require stricter security protocols. • Only store data that is connected to ongoing legal proceedings. Because this data is taken without the individual’s consent, some participants felt there is no need for the City to retain information that is not linked to an ongoing investigation or legal case. This suggestion may be a difficult-to-implement double-edged sword because it may be impossible to know if data will be relevant to a future case. • Require permission and/or notify the individual for third-party use of the data. This includes any use of the data outside the parameters for which it was collected, including sharing with other law enforcement agencies. • Use different colors to distinguish official police drones. This suggestion came specifically from Spanish-speaking Group 6, and the participant felt this would help people more easily distinguish between personal and law enforcement drones. This man felt using a bright, easily noticeable color – and clearly letting residents know about this identifying feature – may help folks quickly recognize official drones. • Ban cameras being pointed at windows or private (non-public) areas. When this recommendation surfaced, it was acknowledged that residents would feel more comfortable if they are certain that police or security cameras are not encroaching on their reasonable right to privacy on their property. This suggestion is also relevant to the next category – keeping video which the City collects private. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 700 of 810 13 Keeping Video the City Collects Private Like we saw previously, many ideas for keeping video the City collects private overlap with other data categories including data expiry dates, storing data in a secure location, bans on third party sales, strict access protocols, and greater transparency and accountability for misuse. Suggestions that are unique to the video category include: • Save only the drone footage capturing the incident in question, not the drone’s entire trip to and from the police station. Participants felt keeping footage of the entire flight was unnecessary. Limiting drone video to the incident minimizes the chances that uninvolved persons will be negatively impacted should a breach occur. • Blur out/remove persons not involved in the incident from any saved footage. Folks felt there was no need for uninvolved individuals to have their image remain on stored video. The worry is that, should the video be released – either intentionally or unintentionally – people who have nothing to do with the incident will be negatively impacted through their assumed involvement or potentially misidentified. • Notify (or attempt to notify) all people in the video – whether involved in the incident or not – that they are in the video. • Do not use facial recognition software. Only one group was adamant on this point. • Ensure footage is not manipulated in any way. Use of selective editing or any attempts to use a video to fit a narrative were looked down upon. • Publicly release video only for serious crimes, when searching for dangerous criminals, or in cases of police misconduct. Participants felt that limiting public release to only these instances helps keep resident privacy intact and lessens the risk of misidentification and potentially unwarranted negative impacts on uninvolved persons. Having a legal team review the footage for risks before it is released was also suggested. In general, it’s encouraging to see many of the same suggestions appear across all six groups. Examples of What Other Cities are Doing To help participants get a grasp on what policies to protect sensitive information actually look like, John and Cris gave three examples of policies that have been implemented elsewhere and asked folks to comment on what they liked and disliked about them. Seattle – Keeping the Records You Give the City Confidential Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions. [removed for Groups 5 and 6] This policy was broadly well-received given the widespread desire for increased transparency surrounding personal data. One of Group 2’s participants captured this sentiment and appreciated that “they are making the effort to be transparent.” One man was even more enthusiastic about it saying, ““Great idea. They should have a website that discloses all the info they capture and why. Also include HOW they do it.” 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 701 of 810 14 Although there was little pushback to the policy, there was some resistance to the use of a website to communicate with residents. One commented, “it’s nice that they post it, but I think a billboard would be more effective than a website,” while one suggested using bulletins or a “pay wall” where site visitors first watch video about how data is used before moving on to the website. Hispanic residents in Groups 5 and 6 were especially concerned about a website “that would be long and wordy, difficult to find, and generally inaccessible,” and one participant wondered whether the information would be available in Spanish. Berkeley – Keeping Private the Information the City Collects Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased. This policy is divisive and clearly cuts both ways. Many participants – including most Hispanic panelists – are totally on board with facial recognition technology. They see it as “another tool” to use to fight crime and some pointed out it doesn’t need to be “definitive” in terms of identifying criminals. One ethnically White female who opposed this policy used an example to illustrate her point by saying, “If children are taken across state lines, every resource needs to be used. Limit it yes; ban no” while another White male opponent felt “there is no reason to eliminate it, but many reasons to depend on it to an extent.” Those on the other side of the fence typically argue artificial intelligence is not advanced enough yet to 100% accurately identify people which might “open a Pandora’s box for litigation issues.” Rather than concerns about racial bias, most – but not all -- opposition was rooted in the technology not yet being as good as it needs to be. Even when specifically asked about the potential for racial bias, participants generally didn’t see it that way, including most participants in Groups 5 and 6 who did not believe that facial recognition systems, nor the artificial intelligence behind this technology, is biased and faulty. As one of these folks pointed out, “it’s less biased than people making decisions.” One woman also pushed back on the policy by saying, “they used to use physical pictures; those can also be biased, and they could identify the wrong person.” Digging a little deeper, John asked respondents who favored a ban on facial recognition on the grounds that technology is not advanced enough yet whether they would change their tune once technology improves. Interesting, most hinted that, if and when the artificial intelligence is more reliable, they’d want Chula Vista to use it. As one woman put it, “The technology is still growing, and the artificial intelligence is still learning, so it can make errors right now. But maybe in 5 to 10 years it might be a different story.” Although these participants softened toward the idea of using facial recognition software in the future, one still took issue with banning it until it improves and used advances in DNA to illustrate her point: “I don’t think they should ban it – it’s another tool. It just needs to improve. Like DNA. We need all the help we can get when it comes to crime.” Given the rift this policy elicited, Chula Vista probably does not want to take a hard stand in either direction at this time. Banning facial recognition completely will be perceived as abandoning a helpful crime fighting tool, but relying on it as the sole source of identification is too risky given the abilities of current AI technology. Finding a happy medium and using the software sparingly and only when necessary is a good bet for the time being. As technology improves, the City can ramp up its use accordingly. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 702 of 810 15 Oakland – Keeping Video the City Collects Private Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council. Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Board was another well-liked policy with most people across sessions agreeing Chula Vista should investigate adopting something similar. The only hesitation – which emerged in all six groups – stems from concerns about who is on the Board, what their motives are, and whether it would favor the pro- or anti-surveillance contingent. One man opined on this, saying, “Is everyone on the board from a tech company? Who is on the board? I think it is a good way of approaching it with the right people on the board. It could go two ways. Like the San Diego Transit Board seems one sided – very pro public transit. So, this could be similar – like very pro or anti surveillance.” Several residents also questioned whether board members would be representative of the community, i.e., will it have Spanish speakers, men and women, people of different racial/ethnic backgrounds, residents of different socio-economic status and professions, etc. Some solutions to this anxiety were discussed in several of the groups and included allowing residents to vote on who fills the board positions and rotating members off the board at regular intervals. One suggested the latter saying, “This is something we could benefit from providing people were rotated off the board like every 90 days. The longer people are on, the more opportunity there is for corruption.” Although his time frame – 90 days – is not realistic, the principle of board term limits is highly popular. Finally, one participant suggested that the board produce regular data-driven reports; this would give the board legitimacy and increase transparency in the decision-making process. Note: The Oakland policy was unintentionally displayed in English during Group 6. After acknowledging the mistake, the discussion continued and then Cris asked whether participants preferred seeing the policy in English or Spanish. All but two said either was fine, and, while the other two preferred Spanish, they felt they would not have a problem with rules written in English. Privacy Policies During the next part of the sessions, John and Cris presented different policy ideas which the City of Chula Vista might adopt. Participants discussed the proposed policies, which came with a line about potential costs or downsides, for their feedback and then support or opposition on each. Each group was presented five policies to evaluate and all materials for Groups 5 and 6 were translated and presented in Spanish (see Appendix C). The policies have been ranked below based on how supportive residents were of each. Except for the Equitable Deployment of Technology policy, all of the policies we tested encountered more support than reservations. (Please note that some participants were unsure how they felt about certain policies and did not vote. As a result, the total number of votes for each policy may not equal the total number of respondents who were exposed to the policy.) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 703 of 810 16 Chief Privacy Officer (Groups 2, 4, 6) “The City would hire a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) responsible for overseeing all City privacy efforts. The CPO would be the in-house privacy protection expert who gathers community input and ideas on privacy and technology, stays up-to-date on the latest developments, is a resource for City staff and helps draft policies for how technology should be used. The CPO would be appointed by, and answer to, the City Manager, receive a $170,000 salary and have a staff of two.” Support: 18 Oppose/Have Reservations: 3 The most popular policy we tested, participants agreed a person and department to turn to for answers should a data breach occur would establish accountability for keeping information safe and confidential. One participant was taken aback that the City did not already have a CPO saying, “I am surprised this is a proposition; that this is not already a position someone is doing,” while one man remarked, “Make it someone’s job and hold them accountable through legislation so they need to be on the ball, and there will be consequences if they were to not do their job.” This was also one of the suggestions made multiple times when participants were asked for recommendations on how Chula Vista should keep personal data safe. The one concern that emerged about the position was the potential for cronyism with the CPO reporting to the City Manager who reports directly to the City Council. Another woman shared this concern explaining, “The way you get positions in government is who you know. And that is not a situation where you want to put resident privacy in the hands of three people.” A few people suggested the CPO should be elected to combat potential cronyism. The consensus was that, regardless of how people are chosen for this position, the CPO’s office should act with a measure of independence. Training (Groups 1, 3, 5) “This policy would mandate annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology on how to recognize potential privacy issues when considering whether to buy a new type of technology or software. The City’s lawyers would attend legal training to grow their expertise on recent laws and court rulings on personal privacy, data collection, etc. There would be a significant additional cost to the city.” Support: 17 Oppose/Have Reservations: 2 Mandating annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology was another very popular “commonsense” policy. Nearly every participant exposed to it favored it and one resident described good training as “priceless.” It’s also a repeat offender: it was suggested several times by the groups as a means to keeping personal data safe during the ideation phase. Many participants said they must complete a similar training in their jobs, and that “Chula Vista is way behind the times if they don’t already do this.” If the City already has this in place, it should contemplate whether the curriculum needs to be updated or strengthened to remain current. Communicating with residents about the training efforts also appears to be important in gaining public trust. The only reservations related to the potentially high cost of starting a training program, with a couple of folks believing taxpayer dollars should go towards things such as homelessness, schools, and public services. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 704 of 810 17 Oversight Board (Groups 2, 4, 6) “This policy would establish a board of community volunteers who would review how the city is using technology and advise on whether privacy protections are, in their view, working. The board would recommend to the City Council as to whether the use of a technology is worth the costs and potential privacy risks. Members would be required to have expertise in technology or privacy issues.” Support: 16 Oppose/Have Reservations: 5 Having an oversight board is another well-received policy, but participants typically wanted it fleshed out. Support generally came down to 1) the board being voluntary and, 2) the need for board members to have expertise in technology or privacy issues. As a female participant put it, “this is a no brainer that it would be good.” One man agreed saying, “I think this is the kind of thing we need to implement these policies. It’s our information they are collecting, so it should be us as a community who decides how it is used.” Although broadly appealing, a few concerns did crop up. Could a panel of community volunteers have the knowledge and expertise to make effective recommendations? Will volunteers have access to confidential information? A few folks suggested assuaging these fears by including non-tech people on the Board and ensuring all members are thoroughly vetted. Some also felt a member’s tenure should be brief, with a preference for only a two-year term. Finally, the phrase “community volunteers” tends to elicit less cynicism about an oversight board than does “citizens” (as used in Oakland’s policy.) More Oversight by the City Council (Groups 2, 4, 6) “This policy would require the City Council to review all purchases of technology that collects personal information. The Council currently only reviews purchases costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and city employees can make smaller purchases without the Council’s pre-approval. The policy would result in the City Council reviewing relatively small budget items.” Support: 14 Oppose/Have Reservations: 5 More oversight is a recurring theme. It’s something that most participants like and all in Spanish language Group 6 favored making the Council do more work. This policy has far more proponents than detractors, as supporters tend to see this as “two-fer.” Not only will privacy be enhanced, for them, this policy is a means for the City Council to curtail needless spending. One noted, “smaller things start adding up to larger things until it is too late,” and another mentioning it is “very easy for misuse of funds to happen in small amounts; people get away with it.” Another resident observed that many tech products “won’t be expensive for very much longer” and therefore will be overlooked when they fall below the current review threshold. Although she favored the spirit of the policy, one actually felt review shouldn’t be limited to a dollar amount, rather “the origin of where it is being purchased from; I don’t want [the equipment or service] coming from a company that has a history of data breaches.” Among the few opponents, reservations about “red tape and the ability to get things done,” “the effort is not worth the reward,” it is too “overwhelming” and “time consuming” as well as the potential for the Council to lose its focus on other big concerns were all mentioned. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 705 of 810 18 Anonymizing Data (Groups 1, 3, 5) “This policy would require city staff to remove personally identifiable information from data whenever possible. By “de-identifying” data, this policy would reduce the possibility that data would be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, there may be a situation in which knowing who filed a complaint, for example, would help the City address a problem.” Support: 13 Oppose/Have Reservations: 5 For most folks, this was a “commonsense” policy although the concerns that some participants raised are significant. On one hand, this policy is a winner because it aligns with common practices many participants are aware of at private and public entities. As one man pointed out, “Redacting PII is fairly common – I expect they should be doing this already. Or I would hope they are. Every agency should be doing this unless that information is important for WHAT they are doing.” A female participant also summed up the overall appeal of the policy saying, “I like the idea of removing information that could be stolen or used inappropriately.” Opponents homed in on the inability to follow up with residents who make complaints or the potential for crimes to go unsolved due to a lack of identifiable information. As one man explained, “It’s a lot harder to investigate a complaint if you don’t have the source because not enough information will be there to begin with. I know from personal experience.” Another backed him up saying, “I’ve seen anonymous complaints; they are hard to address, and lead to a waste of resources.” Many of those whose worries hinged on the inability to adequately investigate crimes believed the benefits of confidentiality do not outweigh the drawbacks of a lack of information that could be used by law enforcement. Finding a balance between anonymizing data and still being able to follow-up is generally what our participants want. Data Sharing (Groups 2, 4, 6) “This policy would limit Chula Vista’s ability to share with outside third parties the personal information the City has collected. This policy limits the sharing of license plate data with police departments in other cities. Some crimes in other cities would likely go unsolved.” Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 7 This policy received majority support as written. However, its popularity ratcheted up if one carve-out is made: most participants want police departments in other municipalities to have access to the data “for solving crimes or keeping community safe.” This dovetails completely with the group suggestions that the City should ban third-party sales but allow exceptions for most law enforcement activities. Law enforcement is fine, even encouraged; marketing uses are not, as panelists vehemently do not want their personal data shared commercially. As long as the City sticks to these stipulations, participants believe this policy will be a success. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 706 of 810 19 Minimizing Data Collection (Groups 1, 3, 5) “This policy would require that city staff minimize the amount of personal information collected. According to this policy, if it not absolutely necessary for the City to collect a type of personal information, then that information would not be collected. This policy would result in less information for the City to use to make decisions, and it may be impossible to know what personal information is absolutely necessary for it to do its job.” Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 7 Elements of this policy arose during previous exercises, but this version does not perform as strongly as one might have initially anticipated based on the preceding discussions. While the concept is well-liked, some felt the language was vague and didn’t include enough detail – after all, what qualifies as “absolutely necessary?” Others said the very nature of the policy suggests the City is already capturing and keeping data they don’t need, which didn’t sit well with some: “If the information is not needed, why do they need to take it?” Still others with reservations also contemplated the data’s potential future usefulness saying, “I don’t like the idea of minimizing data that would lead to less efficient practices in the city,” and “data is important. Even if it is not used now, it may be used later down the line when a new project comes up or another task is needed.” Participants would have benefited from clarifying language that finds a balance between limiting data collection and having useful data on hand for when it is needed. Regular Audits (Groups 2, 4, 6) “This policy would require the City to retain a privacy auditing firm to regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised. There would be a significant additional cost to the City.” Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 9 Those favoring this policy tended to see it as “commonsense,” saying, “A majority of agencies require a third party to step in and audit. After people do something for a while, neglect can happen, like people overlooking things, getting lazy, or watching cat videos at work. And it shouldn’t just be one entity; one can do the audit for certain period of time and then switch to someone else because that agency also needs to be kept in check.” The chief criticism of the policy centered on the unknown costs. Spanish speaking Group 6 brought up an observation: the policy description raised doubts they did not previously hold about how Chula Vista now collects data, shares data, etc. The wording “regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised” suggests the City is currently not doing this which sets off alarm bells. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 707 of 810 20 Time Limits on Data Retention (Groups 1, 3, 5) “This policy would require the City to delete any personal information after one year. Keeping information only for only a year and then deleting it would lessen the chance that personal information could be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, keeping information longer could provide greater benefits, for example, if a crime is being investigated or a missing person’s report has been filed after a year.” Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 9 Given how popular data expiry dates were during the suggestion exercise, it’s surprising to find this policy is not a superstar. The barrier to wider popularity seems to be the specified duration for which the data is held by the City. However, residents did express an interest in determining expiration dates based on the reasoning behind the data being held; an amendment allowing for longer retention for active criminal investigations was suggested that emerged in three of the groups. Some also suggested that a year was not long enough because the data could be needed for future investigations, while others felt a year was entirely too long. Further research is likely needed to determine the optimal data retention length. Equitable Deployment of Technology (Groups 1, 3, 5) “This policy would prohibit the use of technology in ways that might impact certain neighborhoods or groups. City staff would be required to find alternatives to a particular technology that might disproportionately impact women, Black residents, or non-English speakers, for example. On the other hand, there may be no effective alternatives to some technologies and, in the rare instances that the technology is imperfect, the courts will protect the innocent.” Support: 0 Oppose/Have Reservations: 15 This policy received no support, as even those who agreed earlier with Berkeley’s ban were not willing to accept this policy. Participants found it to be “vague,” “confusing,” and “ambiguous” with one resident not being able to “understand what you are agreeing to.” The word “equitable” also turned some off with one male participant calling it “BS.” There was also general confusion about how technology can be biased, with one noting, “the only thing that can be biased is the person behind the technology.” If that is what this language was trying to get at, it failed. Community Involvement Only one participant across all six groups claimed to be formally involved with Chula Vista’s boards and commissions. One woman reported taking part in volunteer efforts, recounting her time with a City of Chula Vista volunteer security effort, like a neighborhood watch. She was driven to do so after having her house broken into twice. A few people expressed some interest in getting involved, but most were unenthusiastic about doing so. The primary barriers to this sort of civic engagement include a lack of time and a lack of passion for the subject. A couple of participants already volunteer elsewhere – “I’m already really committed to my children’s school” – and didn’t want additional responsibilities. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 708 of 810 21 Many folks felt “the City doesn’t do a good job communicating on stuff” and the top suggestions to encourage more community engagement included emails, mailers, and social media posts. One proposed a dedicated city website such as “joinCV.com” or “volunteerCV.com” that “makes it easy for people” to apply to be on committees or find volunteer opportunities. Using community social media pages – “places where people are going to see it” – to advertise opportunities was the most popular idea with one participant advocating for “compact outreach,” which he explained is “30-second-long (or less) outreach for those in the younger generation.” Another recommended including the topics for discussion for official meetings or on the boards/committees “because I would be interested in certain topics” and residents might show more interest in attending or signing up to serve on them. Other suggestions included announcements on the Chula Vista Police Department’s digital billboard and having informative materials and a physical presence at local street fairs, churches, and schools. Regardless of the medium used, one man said he would like the public to be made aware of what the ideas from these types of efforts transform into; for example, what decisions or changes are made from the findings of these focus groups. The Spanish language groups tended to focus on what elected officials are doing or not doing. The thing Group 6 rallied around was they would want to see more of these leaders in their communities (i.e., PTA meetings, meet and greets, workshops, etc.) where they would be informed and welcomed to the discussion of city issues. They felt a more frequent physical presence of leaders in Latino neighborhoods would make them feel that their voices mattered and would lead to more engagement. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 709 of 810 APPENDIX A 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 710 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022 1 Tuesday, June 21st Grp #1 (Q4 = 2 or 3 or 4 or 8): [5:30 SD] Grp #2 (Q4 = 1 or 2 or 3 or 8): [7:30 SD] Thursday, June 23rd Grp #3 (Q4 = 1 or 2 or 8): [5:30 SD] Grp #4 (Q4 = 3 or 4 or 8): [7:30 SD] HOLD First Name______________________________ Last name ________________________________ Gender = M F Age = 1 2 3 4 Hispanic (Q14) = Yes No Address ___________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________ Zip: 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Chula Vista area (Q2): West Central East Q4: 1 2 3 4 8 Database ph. #(_________)_____________________ Alternate ph. #(________)_________________ Email Address__________________________________________ Payment = Venmo Amazon Gift Card Interviewer VOXCO ID__________________ Date recruited __________________________________ Tech Check: Time: ____ AM PM Day: _____________ Date: _______________ Hello, may I speak with RESPONDENT FROM LIST? This is [INTERVIEWER] of Competitive Edge Research, a national public opinion polling firm, calling because we are conducting a paid, online evening focus group about important local issues on either Tuesday, June 21st or Thursday, June 23rd. To ensure we receive opinions from a variety of people, we’d like you to participate in a 90-minute online webcam group from your home. For your participation, you will receive $110 by your choice of cash via Venmo or an Amazon gift card, Would this be of interest to you? (IF “YES,” CONTINUE; IF “NO” OR HESITANT, TERMINATE) Great! First, I need to ask a few confidential questions to see if you fit the study guidelines… Q1. Do you still reside in the (READ ZIP CODE FROM SCREEN) ZIP Code? 1. Resides in listed ZIP Code (91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915) 2. Resides in different ZIP Code (ENTER NEW ZIP CODE) 3. No, does not reside in 91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915 (THANK AND TERMINATE) Q2. And do you reside west of Interstate 805, between the 805 and the 125 or east of the 125? 1. West [MIN 4/MAX 8] 2. Central [MIN 2/MAX 5] 3. East [MIN 1/MAX 3] 8. UNSURE [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 711 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022 2 Q3. Please tell me what is the most important issue facing Chula Vista? (IF UNSURE, PROBE. IF STILL UNSURE, CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE) (CRITERION: CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THE RESPONDENT AND DO THEY EXPRESS A THOUGHTFUL ANSWER?) 1. Extremely thoughtful and clear [MAX 4 PER GROUP; IF FULL, SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] 2. Very thoughtful and clear 3. Somewhat thoughtful and clear 4. No details [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] 5. Nothing/Unsure [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] Q4. The City of Chula Vista collects and maintains residents’ personal information, including phone numbers, property addresses, e-mail addresses, and video from security cameras. When it comes to keeping that personal information private, do you generally think the city is doing a good job or a bad job? (IF GOOD JOB ASK: “Is that a very good job or a somewhat good job?”) (IF BAD JOB ASK: “Is that a very bad job or a somewhat bad job?”) 1. Very good job [GROUP 2 OR 3] 2. Somewhat good job [GROUP 1, 2 OR 3] 3. Somewhat bad job [GROUP 1, 2 OR 4] 4. Very bad job [GROUP 1 OR 4] 8. UNSURE [MAX 5] 9. REFUSED [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] Q5. Including volunteer work, do you or anyone in your household work for any of the following? A news media company [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] A high tech or computer company A market research company [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] In law enforcement [NOTE: RETIREES ARE INELIGIBLE PROBE AS NEEDED; IF RESPONDENT OR SOMEONE IN HOUSEHOLD IS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] An elected official [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] An attorney or law firm [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] NONE OF THESE Q6. What is your occupation? IF RETIRED, NOTE AND ASK: What was your occupation? __________________________________________________________ EXCLUDE LAW ENFORCEMENT, LEGAL, NEWS MEDIA, POLITICAL Q7. And in what industry is that? ________________________________________________________ Q8. Which of the following describes your experience with video conferencing platforms like Zoom and Microsoft Teams while on your laptop or desktop computer? 1. I have talked with people online with my webcam on my desktop or laptop 2. I haven’t tried that [THANK AND TERMINATE] 3. I don’t have a laptop or a desktop [THANK AND TERMINATE] 8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE] 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 712 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022 3 Q9. Does the computer or laptop you would use for the focus groups have a webcam, audio speakers or earphones, and a microphone? 1. Yes 2. No [THANK AND TERMINATE] 8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE] Q10. Do you use Chrome, Firefox or something else to browse the Internet? 1. Chrome 2. Firefox 3. Something else [THANK AND TERMINATE] 8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE] Q11. Is your broadband Internet connection speed where you would use your computer or laptop for participating in the online discussion… 1. Less than 10 megabits upload and download (ex: can only stream music from Spotify or Pandora, email, and basic web browsing) [THANK AND TERMINATE] 2. More than 10 megabits upload and download (ex: can Skype and Facetime calls, play online video games, stream video from Netflix) 8. UNSURE: Please go to BandWidthPlace.com and press the “start” button in the middle of the orange circle to determine download and upload internet speeds. Q12. You'll read and evaluate materials on your computer screen as well as write some notes on paper. Do you have limitations that would make your participation difficult? (IF YES, PROBE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE RESPONDENT CAN PARTICIPATE. PARTICIPATION ONLY VIA COMPUTER OR LAPTOP) 1. Respondent can participate 2. Respondent CANNOT participate [THANK AND TERMINATE] Q13. In terms of gender, how do you identify? (DO NOT READ) 1. Male 2. Female 3. Non-binary 4. Prefer to self-describe: _________________________ Q14. What is your racial or ethnic heritage? 1. White or Caucasian 2. African American or Black [MIN 1] 3. Hispanic or Latino [MIN 4/MAX 8] 4. Asian American [MIN 1] 5. Native American 6. Multi-ethnic 8. Something Else (SPECIFY AND CODE ABOVE, “EUROPEAN” IS WHITE, IF REFUSED, DO NOT INVITE) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 713 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022 4 Q15. In what year were you born? ________________ (ENTER YEAR BORN) 1. 1989-2003 (18-32) [MIN 2/MAX 6 PER GROUP] 2. 1976-1988 (33-46) [MIN 2/MAX 6 PER GROUP] 3. 1964-1975 (47-58) 4. 1950-1963 (59-72) 5. 1949 or earlier (73+) NONE [TERMINATE] Those are all my questions. I’ll place you on hold a moment to make sure we have room for you in the focus group. I’ll be right back (CHECK QUOTAS) IF INVITING: Q16. We'd like you to participate in a 90-minute webcam focus group on [Tuesday the 21st/Thursday the 23rd] at [5:30pm/7:30pm]. Afterward you would be paid $110 via Venmo or an Amazon gift card. Would you commit to participating? 1. Yes – Grp #1 5:30pm, Tuesday the 21st 2. Yes – Grp #2 7:30pm, Tuesday the 21st 3. Yes – Grp #3 5:30pm, Thursday the 23rd 4. Yes – Grp #4 7:30pm, Thursday the 23rd 5. No (THANK AND TERMINATE) Q17. Would you like to receive your payment via an Amazon gift card or Venmo? 1. Amazon gift card 2. Venmo GET THEIR VENMO ID: @___________________& Phone #attached to Accnt___________ Q18. May I have your e-mail address so we may send you the confirmation and participation instructions? (REPEAT IT BACK LETTER-FOR-LETTER AS YOU WRITE IT DOWN EMAIL: ______________________________________________@___________________________ Q19. We will need to perform simple equipment and Internet speed checks with you on the PC or laptop on which you will be participating. What is the good time in the next 48 hours to call you back and perform this check? Time: _______ AM PM Day: _________ Date: _________ Following the equipment check you’ll then receive a link for the online focus group with log in details. You will also receive an invite e-mail which will include further instructions along with a non-disclosure agreement. Please read it carefully. If you have any questions, please write down this number and call us. (PAUSE FOR RESPONDENT TO GET PEN AND PAPER). It is 1-915-329-2102. May I please have an alternate number we can reach you at? (________)____________________. Thank you very much. Again, if you don’t hear from us within the next 48 hours, please call us at 1-915-329- 2102 and let us know. Goodbye. IF NOT INVITING: I’m sorry. I can’t invite you to participate because the quotas for your profile have been filled. We’ll call you in the future for another research project. Thanks and have a great day! 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 714 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022 5 IF HOLD: I’m sorry, but all the quotas for your demographics have been filled, so I am unable to invite you to participate. However, it’s likely that a participant will cancel at the last minute. If that is the case, should we re- contact you to see if you’re still available? IF “OK”: Great! Again, we will only be contacting you if someone drop s out. It may even be early that afternoon. (FILL OUT THE FRONT. GET E -MAIL ADDRESS AND ALTERNATE NUMBER) Thanks, and if we don’t contact you this time, hopefully we can speak with you next time we do research in your area. Goodbye. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 715 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022 1 Grp #1 (Q4 = 1 or 2 or 8): [5:30 SD] Grp #2 (Q4 = 3 or 4 or 8): [7:30 SD] HOLD First Name______________________________ Last name ________________________________ Gender = M F Age = 1 2 3 4 Record source: L2 Client Address ___________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________ Zip: 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915 Q2: West Central East Q4: 1 2 3 4 8 Database ph. #(_________)_____________________ Alternate ph. #(________)_________________ Email Address__________________________________________ Payment = Venmo Amazon Gift Card Interviewer VOXCO ID__________________ Date recruited __________________________________ Tech Check: Time: ____ AM PM Day: _____________ Date: _______________ [START IN ENGLISH] Hello, may I speak with RESPONDENT FROM LIST? This is [INTERVIEWER] of Competitive Edge Research, a national public opinion polling firm, calling because we are conducting a paid, online evening focus group about important local issues on Thursday, July 21st. The majority of the meeting will be conducted in Spanish. To ensure we receive opinions from a variety of people, we’d like you to participate in a 90-minute online webcam group from your home. For your participation, you will receive $110 by your choice of cash via Venmo or an Amazon gift card. Would this be of interest to you? (IF “YES,” CONTINUE; IF “NO” OR HESITANT, TERMINATE) [SPANISH] Hola, ¿puedo hablar con RESPONDENT FROM LIST? Habla [INTERVIEWER] de Competitive Edge Research, una firma encuestadora de opinión pública nacional, y estamos realizando un grupo de discusión nocturno pagado en línea sobre temas locales importantes el jueves 21 de julio. Para garantizar que recibamos opiniones de diversas personas, nos gustaría que usted participara en un grupo en línea de 90 minutos por cámara web desde su hogar. Para agradecer su participación, recibirá $110 a elección suya como efectivo mediante Venmo o una tarjeta de regalo de Amazon. ¿Esto es algo que le interesaría? (IF “YES,” CONTINUE; IF “NO” OR HESITANT, TERMINATE) ¡Estupendo! En primer lugar, necesito hacerle algunas preguntas confidenciales para ver si usted se ajusta a las directrices del estudio... Q1. ¿Todavía reside en (READ FULL ADDRESS FROM SCREEN)? 1. Resides in listed ZIP Code (91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915) 2. Resides in different ZIP Code (ENTER NEW ZIP CODE) 3. No, does not reside in 91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915 (THANK AND TERMINATE) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 716 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022 2 Q2. Y, ¿usted reside al oeste de la Interestatal 805, entre la 805 y la 125 o al este de la 125? 1. West 2. Central 3. East 8. UNSURE Q3. Hágame el favor de decirme cuál es el tema más importante que enfrenta Chula Vista. (IF UNSURE, PROBE. IF STILL UNSURE, CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE) (CRITERION: CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THE RESPONDENT AND DO THEY EXPRESS A THOUGHTFUL ANSWER?) 1. Extremely thoughtful and clear [MAX 4 PER GROUP; IF FULL, SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] 2. Very thoughtful and clear 3. Somewhat thoughtful and clear 4. No details [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] 5. Nothing/Unsure [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] Q4. La Ciudad de Chula Vista recopila y mantiene información personal de los residentes, incluyendo números telefónicos, direcciones de propiedades, direcciones de email y videos de cámaras de seguridad. En cuanto a mantener privada esa información personal, ¿generalmente piensa que la ciudad hace un buen o mal trabajo manteniendo esa información personal privada? (IF GOOD JOB ASK: “¿Es un trabajo muy bueno o algo bueno?”) (IF BAD JOB ASK: “¿Es un trabajo muy malo o algo malo?”) 1. Very good job [GROUP 1] 2. Somewhat good job [GROUP 1] 3. Somewhat bad job [GROUP 2] 4. Very bad job [GROUP 2] 8. UNSURE [MAX 4] 9. REFUSED [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE] Q5. Incluyendo el trabajo voluntario, ¿usted o alguien de su hogar trabaja en alguna de las siguientes áreas? Una empresa de medios informativos [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] Una empresa de alta tecnología o empresa de computación Una empresa de estudio de mercado [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] En cuerpos policiales [NOTE: RETIREES ARE INELIGIBLE PROBE AS NEEDED; IF RESPONDENT OR SOMEONE IN HOUSEHOLD IS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] Un funcionario electo [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] Un abogado o firma de abogados [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] NONE OF THESE 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 717 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022 3 Q6. ¿A qué se dedica? IF RETIRED, NOTE AND ASK: ¿A qué se dedicaba? __________________________________________________________ EXCLUDE LAW ENFORCEMENT, LEGAL, NEWS MEDIA, POLITICAL Q7. Y, ¿a qué industria pertenece eso? ________________________________________________________ Q8. ¿Cuál de las siguientes opciones describe su experiencia con las plataformas de conferencias de video como Zoom y Microsoft Teams cuando usa su laptop o computadora de escritorio? 1. He hablado con personas en línea con mi cámara web en mi computadora de escritorio o laptop 2. No lo he intentado [THANK AND TERMINATE] 3. No tengo laptop o computadora de escritorio [THANK AND TERMINATE] 8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO [THANK AND TERMINATE] Q9. ¿La computadora o laptop que usaría para los grupos de discusión tiene una cámara web, altavoces o audífonos, y un micrófono? 1. Yes 2. No [THANK AND TERMINATE] 8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE] Q10. ¿Usa Chrome, Firefox u otra cosa para navegar por Internet? 1. Chrome 2. Firefox 3. Something else [THANK AND TERMINATE] 8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE] Q11. La velocidad de su conexión de Internet de banda ancha donde usaría su computadora o laptop para participar en la discusión en línea es de... 1. Menos de 10 megabits de subida y descarga (p.ej., solo puede transmitir música de Spotify o Pandora, enviar/recibir emails, y navegación web básica) [THANK AND TERMINATE] 2. Más de 10 megabits de subida y descarga (p.ej., puede hacer llamadas por Skype y Facetime, jugar videojuegos en línea, transmitir videos de Netflix) 8. UNSURE: Por favor diríjase a BandWidthPlace.com y presione el botón “start” en la parte de en medio del círculo naranja para determinar la s velocidades de subida y descarga de su Internet. Q12. Usted leerá y evaluará materiales en la pantalla de su computadora, también escribirá algu nas notas en papel. ¿Tiene limitaciones que dificultarían su participación? (IF YES, PROBE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE RESPONDENT CAN PARTICIPATE. PARTICIPATION ONLY VIA COMPUTER OR LAPTOP) 1. Respondent can participate 2. Respondent CANNOT participate [THANK AND TERMINATE] 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 718 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022 4 Q13. Por lo que respecta al género, ¿cómo se identifica? (DO NOT READ) 1. Male 2. Female 3. Non-binary 4. Prefer to self-describe: _________________________ Q14. ¿Cuál es su origen racial o étnico? 1. Blanco o caucásico 2. Afroamericano o negro 3. Hispano o latino [MIN 10] 4. Asiático-americano 5. Nativo americano 6. Multiétnico 8. Otro (SPECIFY AND CODE ABOVE, “EUROPEAN” IS WHITE, IF REFUSED, DO NOT INVITE) Q15. ¿En qué año nació? ________________ (ENTER YEAR BORN) 1. 1989-2003 (18-32) [MIN 2/MAX 7 PER GROUP] 2. 1976-1988 (33-46) [MIN 2/MAX 7 PER GROUP] 3. 1964-1975 (47-58) 4. 1950-1963 (59-72) 5. 1949 or earlier (73+) NONE [TERMINATE] Esas son todas mis preguntas. Lo pondré en espera un momento para asegurar que haya espacio para usted en el grupo de discusión. Vuelvo enseguida (CHECK QUOTAS) IF INVITING: Q16. Nos gustaría que participara en un grupo de discusión de 90 minutos por cámara web el jueves 21 a las [5:30pm/7:30pm]. Posteriormente recibirá $110 como pago mediante Venmo o una tarjeta de regalo de Amazon. ¿Se comprometería a participar? 1. Yes – Grp #1 5:30pm, Thursday the 21st 2. Yes – Grp #2 7:30pm, Thursday the 21st 3. No (THANK AND TERMINATE) Q17. ¿Le gustaría recibir su pago mediante una tarjeta de regalo de Amazon o por Venmo? 1. Amazon gift card 2. Venmo GET THEIR VENMO ID: @___________________& 3. 18. ¿Sería tan amable de compartirme su dirección de email para que pueda enviarle la confirmación y las instrucciones para la participación? (REPEAT IT BACK LETTER-FOR-LETTER AS YOU WRITE IT DOWN EMAIL: ______________________________________________@___________________________ 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 719 of 810 Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022 5 Q19. Necesitaremos realizar algunas sencillas revisiones de equipo y de velocidades de Internet con usted en la computadora o laptop en las que usted participará. Solo tardará unos 5 minutos en completarse y es muy básico. ¿Cuándo sería un buen momento en las próximas 48 horas para volverle a llamar y realizar esta revisión? Time: _______ AM PM Day: _________ Date: _________ Después de la revisión del equipo, recibirá un enlace para el grupo de discusión en línea con los detalles de acceso. También recibirá un email de invitación que incluirá instrucciones adicionales junto con un acuerdo de confidencialidad. Por favor léalo con atención. Si tiene alguna pregunta, por favor escriba este número y llámenos. (PAUSE FOR RESPONDENT TO GET PEN AND PAPER). Es el 1-915-329-2102. ¿Podría decirme un número alternativo en el que podamos contactarlo? (________)____________________. Muchas gracias. Nuevamente, si no escucha de nosotros dentro de las próximas 48 horas, por favor llámenos al 1-915-329-2102 y háganoslo saber. Adiós. IF NOT INVITING: Lo siento. No puedo invitarlo a participar porque los cupos para su perfil se llenaron. L o llamaremos en el futuro para otro proyecto de investigación. ¡Gracias y que tenga un estupendo día! IF HOLD: Lo siento, pero todos los cupos para su demografía se llenaron, por lo que no me es posible invitarlo a participar. Sin embargo, algún participante podría cancelar a último minuto. Si eso llegara a pasar, ¿deberíamos consultar si usted aún está disponible? IF “OK”: ¡Estupendo! Solo lo contactaremos si alguien cancela. Incluso podría ser en esa misma tarde. (FILL OUT THE FRONT. GET E-MAIL ADDRESS AND ALTERNATE NUMBER) Gracias, y si no lo contactamos en esta ocasión, esperamos poder hablar con usted la próxima vez qu e hagamos una investigación en su área. Adiós. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 720 of 810 APPENDIX B 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 721 of 810 1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE Group 1: non-Very Good Job FINAL Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies. Ground Rules :30 1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential. 2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time. 3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful. 4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously. 5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly. Warm-up :35 Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves. I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information. SEND DROPS TO TECH Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night… I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed… Issues :40 What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 722 of 810 2 Knowledge :50 Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me. Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not? Experiences with Data Breaches :55 Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Evaluations :05 So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it -- like parking tickets, dog licenses and the recreation classes you may take -- confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out? Ideation :20 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 723 of 810 3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues. Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential. What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private? OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Examples :35 Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the city about approving any surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to a citizens group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 724 of 810 4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE Policy: Data Retention :45 OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on how long the city should retain your data... ADVANCE SLIDE Time limits on data retention: This policy would require the City to delete any personal information after one year. Keeping information only for only a year and then deleting it would lessen the chance that personal information could be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other han d, keeping information longer could provide greater benefits, for example, if a crime is being investigated or a missing person’s report has been filed after a year. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the City was required to delete any personal information after 6 months? What about 2 months? Policy: Training :50 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on training of City staff… ADVANCE SLIDE Training: This policy would mandate annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology on how to recognize potential privacy issues when considering whether to buy a new type of technology or software. The City’s lawyers would attend legal training to grow their expertise on recent laws and court rulings on personal privacy, data collection, etc. There would be a significant additional cost to the city. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the city was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Equitable Deployment :55 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 725 of 810 5 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would deploy technology… ADVANCE SLIDE Equitable deployment of technology: This policy would prohibit the use of technology in ways that might impact certain neighborhoods or groups. City staff would be required to find alternatives to a particular technology that might disproportionately impact women, Black residents, or non-English speakers, for example. On the other hand, there may be no effective alternatives to some technologies and, in the rare instances that the technology is imperfect, the courts will protect the innocent. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the city was unable to use facial recognition tools designed to catch criminals, for example? Policy: Minimal Data Collection :00 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the amount of data Chula Vista would collect… ADVANCE SLIDE Minimizing data collection: This policy would require that city staff minimize the amount of personal information collected. According to this policy, if it not absolutely necessary for the City to collect a type of personal information, then that information would not be collected. This policy would result in less information for the City to use to make decisions, and it may be impossible to know what personal information is absolutely necessary for it to do its job. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to identify unforeseen hazards in certain neighborhoods, for example? Policy: Anonymizing Data :05 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on keeping citizen identities secret… ADVANCE SLIDE 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 726 of 810 6 Anonymizing data: This policy would require city staff to remove personally identifiable information from data whenever possible. By “de -identifying” data, this policy would reduce the possibility that data would be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, there may be a situation in which knowing who filed a complaint, for example, would help the City address a problem. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to contact citizens to follow-up on their concerns, for example? Community Involvement :10 You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city? Thank and dismiss :15 You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session. Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 727 of 810 1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE Group 2: non-Very Bad Job FINAL Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies. Ground Rules :30 1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential. 2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time. 3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful. 4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously. 5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly. Warm-up :35 Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves. I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information. SEND DROPS TO TECH Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night… I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed… Issues :40 What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 728 of 810 2 Knowledge :50 Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me. Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not? Experiences with Data Breaches :55 Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Evaluations :05 So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it, like parking tickets, dog licenses and the classes you may take, confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confi dential? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out? Ideation :20 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 729 of 810 3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues. Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential. What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private? OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Examples :35 Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN TO SHOW EXAMPLE Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give to the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 730 of 810 4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE Policy: Audits :45 OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on auditing City policies... ADVANCE SLIDE Regular audits: This policy would require the City to retain a privacy auditing firm to regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised. There would be a significant additional cost to the City. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the City was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Chief Privacy Officer :50 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on hiring a chief Privacy Officer… ADVANCE SLIDE Chief Privacy Officer: The City would hire a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) responsible for overseeing all City privacy efforts. The CPO would be the in- house privacy protection expert who gathers community input and ideas on privacy and technology, stays up-to-date on the latest developments, is a resource for City staff and helps draft policies for how technology should be used. The CPO would be appointed by, and answer to, the City Manager, receive a $170,000 salary and have a staff of two. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you suppo rt it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. Policy: Equitable Deployment :55 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would share data… ADVANCE SLIDE 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 731 of 810 5 Data sharing: This policy would limit Chula Vista’s ability to share with outside third parties the personal information the City has collected. This policy limits the sharing of license plate data with police departments in other cities. Some crimes in other cities would likely go unsolved. What are your thoughts on this policy? Do you really consider your license plate contain personal information? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the City would be unable to sell the City’s data to generate revenue? What if this policy outright banned the City from sharing personal information with outside third parties? Policy: Minimal Data Collection :00 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how much information the City could collect… ADVANCE SLIDE Oversight board: This policy would establish a board of community volunteers who would review how the city is using technology and advise on whether privacy protections are, in their view, working. The board would recommend to the City Council as to whether the use of a technology is worth the costs and potential privacy risks. Members would be required to have expertise in technology or privacy issues. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you op pose it. Policy: Anonymizing Data :05 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the City Council’s role… ADVANCE SLIDE More oversight by City Council: This policy would require the City Council to review all purchases of technology that collects personal information. The Council currently only reviews purchases costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and city employees can make smaller purchases 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 732 of 810 6 without the Council’s pre-approval. The policy would result in the City Council reviewing relatively small budget items. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the City Council is slower to act on other important policy issues? Community Involvement :10 You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city? Thank and dismiss :15 You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session. Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 733 of 810 1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE Group 3: Good Job FINAL Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies. Ground Rules :30 1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential. 2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time. 3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful. 4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously. 5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly. Warm-up :35 Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves. I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information. SEND DROPS TO TECH Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night… I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed… Issues :40 What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 734 of 810 2 Knowledge :50 Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me. Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not? Experiences with Data Breaches :55 Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Evaluations :05 So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it -- like parking tickets, dog licenses and the recreation classes you may take -- confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is d oing a good job keeping that data and information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out? Ideation :20 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 735 of 810 3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues. Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential. What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private? OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Examples :35 Here are some examples of what other cities have done with reg ard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give the City and how it uses that information are on its website. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the city about approving any surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to a citizens group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 736 of 810 4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE Policy: Data Retention :45 OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on how long the city should retain your data... ADVANCE SLIDE Time limits on data retention: This policy would require the City to delete any personal information after one year. Keeping information only for only a year and then deleting it would lessen the chance that personal information could be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, keeping information longer could provide greater benefits, for example, if a crime is being investigated or a missing person’s report has been filed after a year. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the City was required to delete any personal information after 6 months? What about 2 months? Policy: Training :50 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on training of City staff… ADVANCE SLIDE Training: This policy would mandate annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology on how to recognize potential privacy issues when considering whether to buy a new type of technology or software. The City’s lawyers would attend legal training to grow their expertise on recent laws and court rulings on personal privacy, data collection, etc. There would be a significant additional cost to the city. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the city was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Equitable Deployment :55 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 737 of 810 5 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would deploy technology… ADVANCE SLIDE Equitable deployment of technology: This policy would prohibit the use of technology in ways that might impact certain neighborhoods or groups. City staff would be required to find alternatives to a particular technology that might disproportionately impact women, Black residents, or non-English speakers, for example. On the other hand, there may be no effective alternatives to some technologies and, in the rare instances that the technology is imperfect, the courts will protect the innocent. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the city was unable to use facial recognition tools designed to catch criminals, for example? Policy: Minimal Data Collection :00 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the amount of data Chula Vista would collect… ADVANCE SLIDE Minimizing data collection: This policy would require that city staff minimize the amount of personal information collected. According to this policy, if it not absolutely necessary for the City to collect a type of personal information, then that information would not be collected. This policy would result in less information for the City to use to make decisions, and it may be impossible to know what personal information is absolutely necessary for it to do its job. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to identify unforeseen hazards in certain neighborhoods, for example? Policy: Anonymizing Data :05 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on keeping citizen identities secret… ADVANCE SLIDE 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 738 of 810 6 Anonymizing data: This policy would require city staff to remove personally identifiable information from data whenever possible. By “de -identifying” data, this policy would reduce the possibility that data would be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, there may be a situation in which knowing who filed a complaint, for example, would help the City address a problem. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to contact citizens to follow-up on their concerns, for example? Community Involvement :10 You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city? Thank and dismiss :15 You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session. Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 739 of 810 1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE Group 4: Bad Job FINAL Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies. Ground Rules :30 1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential. 2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time. 3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful. 4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously. 5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly. Warm-up :35 Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves. I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information. SEND DROPS TO TECH Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night… I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed… Issues :40 What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 740 of 810 2 Knowledge :50 Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me. Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not? Experiences with Data Breaches :55 Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience? Evaluations :05 So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it, like parking tickets, dog licenses and the classes you may take, confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confi dential? What’s the main reason you say that? And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that? Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out? Ideation :20 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 741 of 810 3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues. Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential. What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private? OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private? OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS Examples :35 Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN TO SHOW EXAMPLE Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give to the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased. What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 742 of 810 4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE Policy: Audits :45 OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on auditing City policies... ADVANCE SLIDE Regular audits: This policy would require the City to retain a privacy auditing firm to regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised. There would be a significant additional cost to the City. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the City was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Chief Privacy Officer :50 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on hiring a chief Privacy Officer… ADVANCE SLIDE Chief Privacy Officer: The City would hire a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) responsible for overseeing all City privacy efforts. The CPO would be the in- house privacy protection expert who gathers community input and ideas on privacy and technology, stays up-to-date on the latest developments, is a resource for City staff and helps draft policies for how technology should be used. The CPO would be appointed by, and answer to, the City Manager, receive a $170,000 salary and have a staff of two. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you suppo rt it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. Policy: Data Sharing :55 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would share data… ADVANCE SLIDE 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 743 of 810 5 Data sharing: This policy would limit Chula Vista’s ability to share with outside third parties the personal information the City has collected. This policy limits the sharing of license plate data with police departments in other cities. Some crimes in other cities would likely go unsolved. What are your thoughts on this policy? Do you really consider your license plate contain personal information? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the City would be unable to sell the City’s data to generate revenue? What if this policy outright banned the City from sharing personal information with outside third parties? Policy: Oversight :00 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how much information the City could collect… ADVANCE SLIDE Oversight board: This policy would establish a board of community volunteers who would review how the city is using technology and advise on whether privacy protections are, in their view, working. The board would recommend to the City Council as to whethe r the use of a technology is worth the costs and potential privacy risks. Members would be required to have expertise in technology or privacy issues. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. Policy: City Council :05 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the City Council’s role… ADVANCE SLIDE More oversight by City Council: This policy would require the City Council to review all purchases of technology that collects personal information. The Council currently only reviews purchases costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and city employees can make smaller purchases 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 744 of 810 6 without the Council’s pre-approval. The policy would result in the City Council reviewing relatively small budget items. What are your thoughts on this policy? Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it. Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it. What if, because of this policy, the City Council is slower to act on other important policy issues? Community Involvement :10 You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city? Thank and dismiss :15 You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session. Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 745 of 810 APPENDIX C 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 746 of 810 Chula Vista Stimuli So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it, like parking tickets, dog licenses and the classes you may take, confidential is one part of privacy. Así que, cuando hablamos de la privacidad, estamos hablando de tres cosas en general: Un aspecto de la privacidad es que la Ciudad mantenga la confidencialidad de la información que uno da en forma de multas de estacionamiento, licencias para perros y clas es que uno toma en un parque de su vecindario. Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. Otro aspecto de la privacidad ocurre cuando la Ciudad recopila datos que uno no le da de manera voluntaria: por ejemplo, cuando la policía utiliza lectores de placas de autos para identificar vehículos robados. Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on t raffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. Otro aspecto está relacionado con los videos. Por ejemplo, las imágenes que captan las cámaras ubicadas en los postes de tráfico, los drones policiales y las cámaras corporales. Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out? ¿Alguno de ustedes cree que la policía enfoca estas prácticas más de lo debido en ciertos grupos? Y, ¿creen que se centran en ciertos grupos étnicos más que en otros? ¿Consideran que enfocan estas prácticas de manera desproporcionada en la comunidad latina de Chula Vista? 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 747 of 810 Group 5 Examples & Policies En la ciudad de Seattle, las políticas relacionadas con la privacidad se publican en la página de internet de la ciudad con t odos los detalles sobre la información que los ciudadanos proporcionan a la Ciudad de manera voluntaria y cómo se utiliza esta información. En la ciudad de Berkeley, se prohíbe el uso de tecnologías de reconocimiento facial. Los líderes de la Ciudad advierten que los sistemas de reconocimiento facial a veces se equivocan e identifican erróneamente a personas como delincuentes. Señalan que la inteligencia artificial que forma la base de dicha tecnología podría estar sujeta a prejuicios. En la ciudad de Oakland, se ha establecido una Comisión Asesora de Privacidad, comprendida por ciudadanos, que hace recomenda ciones a la Ciudad sobre las tecnologías de vigilancia. Los departamentos municipales que desean utilizar un equipo nuevo de vigilanc ia tienen que presentar un informe a este grupo, que – a su vez – hace recomendaciones al Consejo Municipal. Límites de tiempo para la retención de datos Bajo esta política, se requeriría que la Ciudad borrara toda información personal después de un año. Guardar información por solo un año y borrarlo después del año reduciría la posibilidad del robo o mal uso de los datos personales. Por otra parte, guardar la información durante más tiempo podría proporcionar mayores beneficios, por ejemplo, en caso de la investigación de un delito o la presentación de una denuncia de una persona perdida después del año. Capacitación Esta política exigiría la capacitación anual relativa a la privacidad para todo el personal de la Ciudad que trabaja con sistemas tecnológi cos sobre cómo reconocer posibles problemas de violación de derechos de privacidad a la hora de considerar la compra de un sistem a o programa informático nuevo. Los abogados de la Ciudad asistirían a una capacitación legal para ampliar su experiencia y peri cia en materia de las leyes y decisiones jurídicas más recientes sobre la privacidad, la recolección de datos, etc. Implicaría costos adicionales considerables para la Ciudad. Implementación Equitativa de Tecnología Esta política prohibiría el uso de tecnologías de manera que pudiera afectar a determinados vecindarios o grupos. Por ejempl o, se obligaría al personal de la Ciudad a buscar alternativas a un sistema tecnológico que pudiera impactar de manera desproporcionada a mujeres, a residentes afroamericanos o a personas que no hablan inglés. Por otra parte, es possible que no existan alternativas efectivas para determinadas tecnologías y, en caso de que se trate de una tecnología imperfecta, la ley protegerá a los inocentes. Reducción en Recopilación de Datos Esta política requeriría que el personal que trabaja para la Ciudad redujera la recolección de datos personales. De acuerdo a esta política, de no ser indispensable, la Ciudad no tendría que recopilar datos personales. Dicha norma resultaría en menos información a disposición de la Ciudad para que ésta tome decisiones y podría ser imposible s aber cuáles datos son cruciales para que realicen su labor. . Anonimización de Datos Esta regla exigiría que el personal de la Ciudad quitara información personal identificable de los datos recopilados cuando sea posible. Al borrar los datos identificables, esta norma reduciría la posi bilidad de robo o uso inapropiado de información personal. Por otra parte, puede haber una situación en la que el saber quién presenta una denuncia, por ejemplo, podría ayudar a la Ciudad a resolver un problema. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 748 of 810 Group 6 Examples & Policies En la ciudad de Seattle, las políticas relacionadas con la privacidad se publican en la página de internet de la ciudad con todos los detalles sobre la información que los ciudadanos proporcionan a la Ciudad de manera voluntaria y cómo se utiliza esta informa ción. En la ciudad de Berkeley, se prohíbe el uso de tecnologías de reconocimiento facial. Los líderes de la Ciudad advierten que los sistemas de reconocimiento facial a veces se equivocan e identifican erróneamente a personas como delincuentes. Señalan que la inteligencia artificial que forma la base de dicha tecnología podría estar sujeta a prejuicios. Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technolo gy. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council. Auditorías Regulares Esta norma obligaría a la Ciudad a contratar una empresa de auditoría de privacidad para que esta revisara quién tiene acceso a los datos recopilados por la Ciudad y evaluara qué datos han sido observados, descargados o compartidos y por parte de quién. El objetivo es ayudar a la Ciudad a identificar, de manera proactiva, si se ha violado o si se podrían violar los derechos de privacidad. Esta ley supondría costos adicionales considerables para la Ciudad. Director de Privacidad La ciudad contrataría a un Director de Privacidad (CPO, por sus siglas en inglés) que sería responsable de supervisar todos l os esfuerzos de la Ciudad en materia de privacidad. Dicho director sería el experto interno encargado de proteger los derechos de privacidad; recopilaría las perspectivas o recomendaciones de los miembros de la comunidad sobre tecnología y privacidad, se mantendría a l día acerca de los avances más recientes, colaboraría con el personal de la Ciudad y ayudaría a redactar reglas sobre el buen uso de la tecnología. Dicho director sería nombrado por y respondería al Jefe de la Administración Municipal, recibiría un sueldo de $170,000 y ten dría dos asistentes. Compartimiento de Datos Este reglamento limitaría la capacidad de Chula Vista de compartir con terceros la información personal que ha recopilado la Ciudad. Dicha norma limita el compartimiento de datos relacionados con las placas de autos con departamentos de policía en otras ciud ades. Significaría que no se resolverían algunos delitos cometidos en otras ciudades Consejo de Supervisión Bajo esta política, se establecería una Comisión de voluntarios de la comunidad que analizaría el uso de tecnología de la Ciu dad y presentaría informes, desde su perspectiva, sobre la efectividad de las protecciones de privacidad. Dicha comisión haría recomendaciones ante el Consejo Municipal sobre los costos, el valor y los posibles riesgos del uso de ciertas tecnologías. Los miembros tendrían que ser expertos en la materia de tecnología y cuestiones de privacidad. Más vigilancia por parte del Consejo Municipal Esta norma obligaría al Consejo Municipal a revisar todas las adquisiciones/compras de los sistemas que recopilan datos perso nales. En la actualidad, el Consejo sólo revisa las compras de cientos de miles de dólares y los empleados de la Ciudad pueden comprar equipo nuevo de menor costo sin previa aprobación del Consejo. Esta regla significaría que el Consejo Municipal revisaría compras que tienen un impacto relativamente menor en el presupuest o. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 749 of 810 From: Deanna Wolf < Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2022 10:23 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Kim Knox < Subject: Public Comment on Agenda Item 8a November 1 City Council Meeting Dear Mayor Salas, City Manager Kachadoorian, and Councilmembers McCann, Galvez, Padilla, and Cardenas: As you review a citywide Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy, The League of Women Voters San Diego would like to make sure our September 25 letter on surveillance technology and privacy protection is included for consideration (see attached). The League believes cities should enact technology-use ordinances to protect privacy and other civil liberties. We encourage Chula Vista City Council to take careful consideration of the Technology and Privacy Taskforce's recommendations and enact strict guidelines before using taxpayer dollars and other resources for clearly identities purposes for surveillance. Thank you for your consideration. Deanna Wolf (she/her) Director of Advocacy, League of Women Voters of San Diego www.lwvsandiego.org Warning: External Email Item #8.1 - Written Communications Wolf - Received 11/1/2022 mailto:advocacy@lwvsa ndiego.org mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.govmailto:president@lwvsa ndiego.org https:// www.lw v.org/ league- manag ement/ dei- resourc es/ pronou n-and- gender - guidan ce http:// www.lwvsandiego.or g/ 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 750 of 810 City of Chula Vista Surveillance Letter September 25, 2022 Mayor Mary Salas City Manager Maria V. Kachadoorian Councilmembers John McCann, Jill Galvez, Stephen Padilla, Andrea Cardenas City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mayor Salas, City Manager Kachadoorian and Councilmembers of Chula Vista: The City of Chula Vista has access to a growing means of technology-assisted public observation tools. With such power comes the responsibility to make sure the use of such tools both advances public safety and protects the rights of Chula Vista residents. This year, the League of Women Voters of San Diego adopted a position on policing practices. The League believes cities should enact technology-use ordinances to protect privacy and other civil liberties. The proposed ordinances should include requirements for: 1. Audits of specified surveillance policy and surveillance data in an annual report that is publicly available and includes evidence of crime-prevention effectiveness, civil rights impact, fiscal costs, and source of funding for surveillance technology 2. Establishment of independent civilian commissions at the local jurisdiction level which consist of representatives of involved communities of interest such as civil rights advocates, attorneys, marginalized groups, specialists in technology, privacy and open government, to oversee all law enforcement and government acquisition and use of technology for surveillance 3. Enforcement of violations of the ordinances 4. Protection of whistleblowers When surveillance technology is acquired, deployed or used without transparency or independent oversight, public trust in law enforcement can be eroded. We call for legislation to ensure transparency and robust public input regarding funding, acquisition, and use of technology at the earliest possible point and throughout the process. Local decision makers must also establish long-overdue safeguards, including explicit-use policies and verifiable assessment and accountability measures, to protect civil rights, civil liberties and privacy. In particular, legally enforceable protections must be adopted to prevent harms of surveillance historically experienced by certain communities and groups, including privacy protection. The benefits of providing these protections can bring increased trust and increased safety for all. When the Chula Vista Technology and Privacy Taskforce presents its guidelines to balance the use of technology with limits on the use of data later this fall, we hope that Item #8.1 - Written Communications Wolf - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 751 of 810 the Chula Vista City Council will take careful consideration of the privacy protection and civil liberties of residents, enacting strict guidelines before they use taxpayer dollars and other resources for clearly identified purposes for surveillance. This will have the added benefit of greater trust in the government and law enforcement which is needed now. The City of Chula Vista has the opportunity to be a leader in the responsible use of surveillance technology that protects its residents and addresses concerns regarding the acquisition and deployment of surveillance technology. In order for technology to enhance community safety, privacy must be protected through oversight mechanisms and transparency that allow local elected officials and the public to verify that civil rights and civil liberties’ safeguards are being adhered to strictly. Sincerely, Kim Knox President League of Women Voters of San Diego Item #8.1 - Written Communications Wolf - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 752 of 810 From: Margaret Baker < Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2022 10:40 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Letter in support of Surveillance Use and Privacy Board Ordinances, NOT the proposed tech policies I am writing to submit a letter signed by over two dozen community and civil rights organizations in support of the two ordinances: Surveillance Use and Privacy Board Ordinances (NOT the policies proposed by the City Manager). Please see the attached letter and two ordinances. We would like them to be considered as Public Comment for tonight’s agenda item 8.1. Thank you. Sincerely, Maggi Margaret A. Baker, DrPH South Bay People Power promotes social justice through nonpartisan civic engagement. Warning: External Email Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 mailto:mbakerdrph@ gmail.com mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov mailto:mbakerdrph@ gmail.com 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 753 of 810 April 25, 2022 To:Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force Members Re:Need for a Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance in Chula Vista Congratulations on your appointment to the newly formed Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force. We, the undersigned community, civil rights, and service organizations are writing to highlight the urgent need for a surveillance technology and privacy ordinance in the City of Chula Vista. For over a year, we have been voicing our concerns and studying best practices in cities, like the City of San Diego, that also face challenges associated with the increased use of surveillance technology. We have developed an ordinance based on our research, and ask you to build on our proposed Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance and recommend its adoption by the Chula Vista City Council. Surveillance technology carries inherent risks to individual privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties that must be protected by enforceable ordinances, consistent policies and practices, and independent oversight. Transparency, accountability, and oversight of police and governmental use of surveillance technology cannot simply be left implicit within broad technology policy or subsumed within a general set of privacy policies covering less intrusive technologies. Surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing information, but also technology systems that are capable of aggregating information from both public and non-public sources. Such information, in the aggregate or when pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal a wealth of detail about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or sexual associations. We ask that you address the special risks associated with current and potential uses of surveillance technology and data in all phases of your information-gathering and deliberation process, and that you prioritize an enforceable ordinance as part of the technology privacy policy package ultimately proposed by the Task Force and adopted by the City of Chula Vista. The City of Chula Vista takes great public pride in the steps it has taken to achieve its status both as a Welcoming City and as a Smart City. Surveillance technology offers potential benefits for certain efficiencies in government and law enforcement, but it can also negatively impact the privacy, free movement and other civil rights and liberties of community members, and undermine community trust and safety. Historically, surveillance has been used to intimidate and control certain communities and groups more than others. As a Welcoming City, Chula Vista must do more to protect the civil liberties, rights and safety of all. Investigative reporting in local and national media has raised awareness and revealed serious concerns about lack of transparency, accountability, and oversight of Chula Vista’s surveillance programs. Instead of learning from our city officials that CVPD shared our ALPR data with ICE, CBP, and other federal agencies for over three years, we have been shocked to learn about such practices through outside sources. Further, we have been frustrated by the City’s handling of these revelations and the resulting scrutiny. Rather than acting swiftly to acknowledge and Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 754 of 810 Re:Need for a Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance in Chula Vista, April 25, 2022 correct the mistakes, establish independent oversight, and repair damaged community relationships, Chula Vista city officials have continued to prioritize and expand police surveillance programs despite concerted public opposition. These events have revealed larger issues regarding lack of open government, trust and safety that affect all members of our community, and especially the most marginalized. The lasting harm to community trust in Chula Vista caused by the City’s failure to exercise accountability and full transparency regarding its surveillance technology programs cannot be overstated. Formation of the Task Force gives us renewed hope for genuine engagement with community groups and for demonstrated commitment to the values we share and which stand at the core of the “Welcoming City” model. We expect and demand that Chula Vista meet a high standard of accountability, transparency, community consultation, and open governance. Members of our organizations possess relevant lived experience, professional knowledge, and other types of expertise. In writing our Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance for Chula Vista, we drew upon a readily available body of expert knowledge as well as a number of existing ordinances in California cities. Our draft ordinance includes these main features: A detailed, enforceable process for all phases of the approval, acquisition, use, and oversight of all city surveillance technology Parameters for formation of an independent civilian body to oversee this process and make informed recommendations to the City Council Provisions for: Informed public debate at the earliest stage of the process Determination of whether benefits outweigh costs and concerns Establishment of a thorough surveillance use policy Ongoing independent oversight and accountability We look forward to discussing this with you in more detail as the Task Force carefully considers our proposed Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance. A pdf version of the Ordinance was sent to the Task Force via email. A Smart City must constantly anticipate and mitigate the unique and evolving risks associated with surveillance technology, and a Welcoming City must always prioritize and protect its community members’ rights and privacy. We stand ready to work with you in the coming months as the Task Force tackles these complex issues and proposes policies to protect and provide real safety for all community members. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, Ad Hoc STOP Chula Vista PD Surveillance group STOPCVSurveillance@gmail.com Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 755 of 810 Re:Need for a Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance in Chula Vista, April 25, 2022 Supporting Organization Signatories Advancing Students Forward AFT 1931 Local - Immigrant Student Support Committee Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment - ACCE Border Angels Change Begins With ME Espacio Migrante Indivisible San Diego Persist Oakland Privacy Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans (PANA) Pillars of the Community Rise Up San Diego San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium Secure Justice Showing Up for Racial Justice - San Diego (SURJ-SD) South Bay People Power Take Action San Diego Tech Lead San Diego Tech Workers Coalition San Diego Think Dignity TRUST SD (Transparent and Responsible Use of Surveillance Technology San Diego) Coalition San Diego USD Center for Digital Civil Society USD Immigration Law Society USD Values Institute US-Mexico Border Program, American Friends Service Committee We The People SD Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 756 of 810 Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance Revised - July 15, 2022) ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER XXXX TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING RULES FOR THE CITY’S ACQUISITION AND USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista (“City”) takes great public pride in its status as a Welcoming City and as a Smart City; and WHEREAS, smart public safety decisions and the protection of all community members require that municipalities ensure public debate and community involvement in decisions about whether to acquire or use surveillance technology; moreover, that real public safety requires that residents have a voice in these decisions; and WHEREAS, across the U.S. cities that have adhered to a “privacy bill of rights” approach are able to win public support in implementing the technology with proper safeguards in place to build trust. Alternatively, cities that implement new technology in secrecy, without oversight, without policy, and without broad and inclusive public input have found themselves facing scrutiny, lawsuits, and voter referendums to ban certain technologies. WHEREAS, the City Council finds it is essential to have an informed public debate as early as possible about decisions related to the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, while the use of surveillance technology may threaten the privacy of all citizens, throughout history, surveillance efforts have been used to intimidate and oppress certain communities and groups more than others, including those that are defined by a common race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, income level, sexual orientation or political perspective; and WHEREAS, while acknowledging the significance of protecting the privacy of citizens, the City Council finds that surveillance technology may also be a valuable tool to bolster community safety and aid in the investigation and prosecution of crimes; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing non-public places or information (such as wiretaps) but also may include technology which aggregates publicly available information, because such information, in the aggregate or when pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal a wealth of detail about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or sexual associations; and 1 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 757 of 810 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that no decisions relating to the City’s use of surveillance technology should occur without strong consideration being given to the impact such technologies may have on civil rights and civil liberties, including those rights guaranteed by the California and United States Constitutions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that any and all decisions regarding if and how the City’s surveillance technologies should be funded, acquired, or used should include meaningful public input and that public opinion should be given significant weight in policy decisions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that legally enforceable safeguards, including robust transparency, oversight, and accountability measures, must be in place to protect civil rights and civil liberties before any City surveillance technology is deployed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that if a surveillance technology is approved, data reporting measures must be adopted that empower the City Council and public to verify that mandated civil rights and civil liberties safeguards have been strictly adhered to. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: Section I. Establishment A. This Ordinance shall be known as the Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance. B.Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter XXXX,is hereby added as set forth below: Chapter XXXX. REGULATIONS ON CITY’S ACQUISITION AND USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY C.Definitions 1. “Annual Surveillance Report” means a written report concerning a specific surveillance technology that includes all the following: a. A description of how the surveillance technology was used, including the type and quantity of data gathered or analyzed by the technology; b. Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the surveillance technology was shared with internal or external entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed, under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the disclosure(s) except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; c. Where applicable, a description of the physical objects to which the surveillance technology hardware was installed without revealing the specific location of such 2 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 758 of 810 hardware; for surveillance technology software, a breakdown of what data sources the surveillance technology was applied to; d. Where applicable, a description of where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically, by each Police Area in the relevant year; e. A summary of community complaints or concerns about the surveillance technology, and an analysis of its Surveillance Use Policy and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and civil liberties. The analysis shall consider whether, and to what extent, the use of the surveillance technology disproportionately impacts certain groups or individuals; f. The results of any internal audits or investigations relating to surveillance technology, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.To the extent that the public release of such information is prohibited by law, City staff shall provide a confidential report to the City Council regarding this information to the extent allowed by law; g. Information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; h. A general description of all methodologies used to detect incidents of data breaches or unauthorized access, except that no confidential or sensitive information should be disclosed that would violate any applicable law or would undermine the legitimate security interests of the City; I. Information, including crime statistics, that helps the community assess whether the surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified purposes; i. Statistics and information about Public Records Act requests regarding the relevant subject surveillance technology, including response rates, such as the number of Public Records Act requests on such surveillance technology and the open and close date for each of these Public Records Act requests; j. Total annual costs for the surveillance technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs, and what source of funding will fund the surveillance technology in the coming year; and k. Any requested modifications to the Surveillance Use Policy and a detailed basis for the request. 3 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 759 of 810 2. “City” means any department, unit, program, and/or subordinate division of the City of Chula Vista as provided by Chapter XXXX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 3. “City staff” means City personnel authorized by the City Manager or appropriate City department head to seek City Council Approval of Surveillance Technology in conformance with this Chapter. 4. “Community meeting” means a publicly held meeting that is accessible, noticed at least seventy-two hours in advance in at least two languages, for the purpose of educating communities, answering questions, and learning about potential impacts of surveillance technology on disadvantaged groups. 5. “Continuing agreement” means a written agreement that automatically renews unless terminated by one or more parties. 6. “Exigent circumstances” means a City department’s good faith belief that an emergency involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any individual requires the use of surveillance technology that has not received prior approval by City Council. 7. “Facial recognition technology” means an automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual based on an individual’s face. 8. “Individual” means a natural person. 9. “Personal communication device” means a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant, a wireless capable tablet and a similar wireless two-way communications and/or portable internet-accessing device, whether procured or subsidized by a City entity or personally owned, that is used in the regular course of City business. 10. “Police area” refers to each of the geographic districts assigned to a Chula Vista Police Department captain or commander and as such districts are amended from time to time. 11. “Surveillance” (or “spying”) means to observe or analyze the movements, behavior, data, or actions of individuals. Individuals include those whose identity can be revealed by data or combinations of data, such as license plate data, images, IP addresses, user identifications, unique digital identifiers, or data traces left by the individual. 12. “Surveillance technology” means any software (e.g., scripts, code, Application Programming Interfaces), electronic device, or system utilizing an electronic device used, designed, or primarily intended to observe, collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group. It also includes the product (e.g., audiovisual recording, data, analysis, report) of such surveillance technology. Examples of surveillance technology include, but are not limited to the following: cell site simulators (Stingrays); automated license plate readers; gunshot detectors (ShotSpotter); drone-mounted data collection; 4 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 760 of 810 facial recognition software; thermal imaging systems; body-worn cameras; social media analytics software; gait analysis software; video cameras that can record audio or video and transmit or be remotely accessed. It also includes software designed to monitor social media services or forecast and/or predict criminal activity or criminality, and biometric identification hardware or software. Surveillance technology” does not include devices, software, or hardware, unless they have been equipped with, or are modified to become or include, a surveillance technology beyond what is set forth below or used beyond a purpose as set forth below: a. Routine office hardware, such as televisions, computers, credit card machines, badge readers, copy machines, and printers, that is in widespread use and will not be used for any public surveillance or law enforcement functions related to the public; b. Parking Ticket Devices (PTDs) used solely for parking enforcement-related purposes, including any sensors embedded in parking sensors to detect the presence of a car in the space; c. Manually-operated, non-wearable, handheld digital cameras, audio recorders, and video recorders that are not designed to be used surreptitiously and whose functionality is limited to manually-capturing and manually-downloading video and/or audio recordings; d. Surveillance devices that cannot record or transmit audio or video or be remotely accessed, such as image stabilizing binoculars or night vision goggles; e. Manually-operated technological devices used primarily for internal municipal entity communications and are not designed to surreptitiously collect surveillance data, such as radios and email systems; f. City databases that do not contain any data or other information collected, captured, recorded, retained, processed, intercepted, or analyzed by surveillance technology, including payroll, accounting, or other fiscal databases; g. Medical equipment used to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease or injury, provided that any information obtained from this equipment is used solely for medical purposes; h. Police department interview room cameras; i. City department case management systems; j. Personal Communication Devices that have not been modified beyond stock manufacturer capabilities in a manner described above; 5 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 761 of 810 k. Surveillance technology used by the City solely to monitor and conduct internal investigations involving City employees, contractors, and volunteers; and, l. Systems, software, databases, and data sources used for revenue collection on behalf of the City by the City Treasurer, provided that no information from these sources is shared by the City Treasurer with any other City department or third-party except as part of efforts to collect revenue that is owed to the City. 14. “Surveillance Impact Report” means a publicly-posted written report including, at a minimum, the following: a. Description: Information describing the surveillance technology and how it works, including product descriptions from manufacturers; b. Purpose: Information on the proposed purposes(s) for the surveillance technology; c. Location: The physical or virtual location(s) it may be deployed, using general descriptive terms, and crime statistics for any location(s); d. Impact: An assessment of the Surveillance Use Policy for the particular technology and whether it is adequate in protecting civil rights and liberties and whether the surveillance technology was used or deployed, intentionally or inadvertently, in a manner that may disproportionately affect marginalized communities; e. Mitigations: Identify specific, affirmative technical and procedural measures that will be implemented to safeguard the public from each identified impact; f. Data Types and Sources: A list of all types and sources of data to be collected, analyzed, or processed by the surveillance technology, including open source data, scores, reports, logic or algorithm used, and any additional information derived therefrom; g. Data Security: Information about the controls that will be designed and implemented to ensure that adequate security objectives are achieved to safeguard the data collected or generated by the surveillance technology from unauthorized access or disclosure; h. Fiscal Costs and Sources: The forecasted, prior, and ongoing fiscal costs for the surveillance technology, including initial purchase, personnel, and other ongoing costs, and any past, current or potential sources of funding; 6 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 762 of 810 i. Third-Party Dependence: Whether use or maintenance of the surveillance technology will require data gathered by the surveillance technology to be handled or stored by a third-party vendor at any time; j. Alternatives: A summary of all alternative methods (whether involving the use of a new technology or not) considered before deciding to use the proposed surveillance technology, including the costs and benefits associated with each alternative and an explanation of the reasons why each alternative is inadequate; k. Track Record: A summary of the experience (if any) other entities, especially government entities, have had with the proposed technology, including, if available, quantitative information about the effectiveness of the proposed surveillance technology in achieving its stated purpose in other jurisdictions, and any known adverse information about the surveillance technology such as unanticipated costs, failures, or civil rights and civil liberties abuses, existing publicly reported controversies, and any court rulings in favor or in opposition to the surveillance; and l. Public engagement and comments: A description of any community engagement held and any future community engagement plans, number of attendees, a compilation of all comments received and City departmental responses given, and City departmental conclusions about potential neighborhood impacts and how such impacts may differ as it pertains to different segments of the community that may result from the acquisition of surveillance technology. 15. "Surveillance Use Policy" means a publicly-released and legally-enforceable policy for use of the surveillance technology that at a minimum specifies the following: a. Purpose: The specific purpose(s) that the surveillance technology is intended to advance; b. Use: The specific uses that are authorized, and the rules and processes required prior to such use; c. Data Collection: The information that can be collected, captured, recorded, intercepted, or retained by the surveillance technology, as well as data that might be inadvertently collected during the authorized uses of the surveillance technology and what measures will be taken to minimize and delete such data. Where applicable, any data sources the surveillance technology will rely upon, including open source data, should be listed; 7 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 763 of 810 d. Data Access: The job classification of individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the rules and processes required prior to access or use of the information; e. Data Protection: The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access, including logging, encryption, and access control mechanisms; f. Data Retention: The time period, if any, for which information collected by the surveillance technology will be routinely retained, the reason such retention period is appropriate to further the purpose(s), the process by which the information is regularly deleted after that period lapses, and the specific conditions that must be met to retain information beyond that period; g. Public Access: A description of how collected information can be accessed or used by members of the public, including criminal defendants; h. Third Party Data Sharing: If and how information obtained from the surveillance technology can be used or accessed, including any required justification or legal standard necessary to do so and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information; i. Training: The training required for any individual authorized to use the surveillance technology or to access information collected by the surveillance technology; j. Auditing and Oversight: The procedures used to ensure that the Surveillance Use Policy is followed, including internal personnel assigned to ensure compliance with the policy, internal recordkeeping of the use of the surveillance technology or access to information collected by the surveillance technology, technical measures to monitor for misuse, any independent person or entity with oversight authority, and the legally enforceable sanctions for violations of the policy; and k. Maintenance: The procedures used to ensure that the security and integrity of the surveillance technology and collected information will be maintained. Section II. Privacy Advisory Commission Commission”) Notification and Review Requirements A.Commission Notification Required Prior to City Solicitation of Funds and Proposals for Surveillance Technology. 1. City staff shall notify the Chair of the Commission by written memorandum along with providing a Surveillance Use Policy and a Surveillance Impact Report prior to: 8 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 764 of 810 a. Seeking or soliciting funds for surveillance technology, including but not limited to applying for a grant; b. Soliciting proposals with any entity to acquire, share or otherwise use surveillance technology including the information it provides; or c. Formally or informally facilitating in a meaningful way or implementing surveillance technology in collaboration with other entities, including City ones. 2. Upon notification by City staff, the Chair of the Commission shall place the item on the agenda at the next Commission meeting for discussion and possible action. At this meeting, City staff shall present the Commission with evidence of the need for the funds or equipment, or shall otherwise justify the action City staff will seek Council approval for pursuant to Section III. 3. The Commission may make a recommendation to the City Council by voting for approval to proceed, by objecting to the proposal, by recommending that the City staff modify the proposal, or by taking no action. 4. If the Commission votes to approve, object, or modify the proposal, City staff may proceed and seek City Council approval of the proposed surveillance technology initiative pursuant to the requirements of Section III. City staff shall present to City Council the result of the Commission’s review, including any objections to the proposal. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on the item within 90 calendar days of notification to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed and seek City Council approval of the proposed Surveillance Technology initiative pursuant to the requirements of Section II. B.Commission Review and Approval Required for New Surveillance Technology Before City Council Approval 1. Prior to seeking City Council approval under Section III, City staff shall submit a Surveillance Impact Report and a Surveillance Use Policy for the proposed new surveillance technology initiative to the Commission for its review at a publicly noticed meeting. The Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy must address the specific subject matter specified for each document as set forth in Section I. 2. The Commission shall approve, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. If the Commission proposes that the Surveillance Use Policy be modified, the Commission shall propose such modifications to City staff. City staff shall present such modifications to the Commission for approval before seeking City Council approval under Section III. 3. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report, City staff shall complete one or more community meetings in each City Council district where the proposed surveillance 9 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 765 of 810 technology is deployed, with opportunity for public comment and written response. The City Council may condition its approval of the proposed surveillance technology on City staff conducting additional community engagement before approval, or after approval as a condition of approval. 4. The Commission shall recommend that the City Council adopt, modify, or reject the proposed Surveillance Use Policy. If the Commission proposes that the Surveillance Use Policy be modified, the Commission shall propose such modifications to City staff. City staff shall present such modifications to City Council when seeking City Council approval under Section III. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on a presented item within 90 days of notification to the Commission Chair pursuant to Section II, City staff may seek City Council approval of the item. 6. City staff seeking City Council approval shall schedule for City Council consideration and approval of the proposed Surveillance Use Policy, and include Commission recommendations, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a mandatory, properly noticed, germane public hearing. Approval may only occur at a public hearing. C.Commission Review Requirements for Existing Surveillance Technology Before Seeking City Council Approval 1. Prior to seeking City Council approval for existing City surveillance technology used by the City under Section III, City staff shall submit a Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy for each existing surveillance technology to the Commission for its review, and for the public’s review, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a publicly noticed meeting, so the public can prepare for and participate in the Commission meetings. The Surveillance Impact Report and Surveillance Use Policy shall address the specific subject matters set forth for each document in Section I. 2. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report, City staff shall complete one or more community meetings in each City Council district where the proposed surveillance technology is deployed with opportunity for public comment and written response. The City Council may condition its approval on City staff conducting additional outreach before approval, or after approval as a condition of approval. 3. Prior to submitting the Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance Use Policy as described above, City staff shall present to the Commission, and for public review, a list of all surveillance technology possessed and/or used by the City. 4. The Commission shall rank the surveillance technology items in order of potential impact to civil liberties to provide a recommended sequence for items to be heard at Commission meetings. The Commission shall take into consideration input from City 10 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 766 of 810 staff on the operational importance of the surveillance technology in determining the ranking to allow such matters to be heard in a timely manner. 5. Within sixty (60) days of the Commission’s action in Section II(C)(4), and continuing every month thereafter until a Surveillance Impact Report and a Surveillance Use Policy have been submitted for each item of the list, City staff shall submit at least one (1) Surveillance Impact Report and one (1) proposed Surveillance Use Policy per month to the Commission for review, generally beginning with the highest ranking surveillance technology items as determined by the Commission. 6. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on any item within 90 days of submission to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed to the City Council for approval of the item pursuant to Section III. Section III. City Council Approval Requirements for New and Existing Surveillance Technology A. City staff shall obtain City Council approval prior to any of the following: 1. Accepting local, state, or federal funds, or in-kind or other donations for surveillance technology; x2. Acquiring new surveillance technology, including but not limited to procuring such technology without the exchange of monies or consideration; 3. Using existing surveillance technology, or using new surveillance technology, including the information the surveillance technology provides, for a purpose, in a manner, or in a location not previously approved by the City Council pursuant to the requirements of this ordinance; or 4. Entering into a continuing agreement or written agreement with to acquire, share or otherwise use surveillance technology or the information it provides, including data-sharing agreements. 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, nothing herein shall be construed to prevent, restrict or interfere with any person providing evidence or information derived from surveillance technology to a law enforcement agency for the purposes of conducting a criminal investigation or the law enforcement agency from receiving such evidence or information. B.City Council Approval Process 1. After the Commission notification and review requirements in Section II have been met, City staff seeking City Council approval shall schedule a date for City Council consideration of the proposed Surveillance Impact Report and proposed Surveillance 11 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 767 of 810 Use Policy, and include Commission recommendations, at least fifteen (15) days prior to a mandatory, properly-noticed, germane public hearing. Approval may only occur at a public hearing. 2. The City Council shall only approve any action as provided in this Chapter after first considering the recommendation of the Commission, and subsequently making a determination that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology outweigh the costs; that the proposal will safeguard civil liberties and civil rights; and that, in the City Council’s judgment, no alternative with a lesser economic cost or impact on civil rights or civil liberties would be as effective. 3. For Approval of existing surveillance technology for which the Commission does not make its recommendation within ninety (90) days of review as provided for in Section II: if the City Council has not reviewed and approved such item within four (4) City Council meetings from when the item was initially scheduled for City Council consideration, the City shall cease its use of the surveillance technology until such review and approval occurs. C.Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies as Public Records 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Ordinance, Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies are public records. 2. City staff shall make all Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies, as updated from time to time, available to the public as long as the City uses the surveillance technology in accordance with its request pursuant to Section II. 3. City staff shall post all Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies to the City’s website with an indication of its current approval status and the planned City Council date for action. Section IV. Use of Unapproved Surveillance Technology during Exigent Circumstances A. City staff may temporarily acquire or use surveillance technology and the data derived from that use in a manner not expressly allowed by a Surveillance Use Policy only in a situation involving exigent circumstances. B. If City staff acquires or uses a surveillance technology in a situation involving exigent circumstances, City staff shall: 1. Immediately report in writing the use of the surveillance technology and its justifications to the City Council and the Commission; 2. Use the surveillance technology solely to respond to the exigent circumstances; 3. Cease using the surveillance technology when the exigent circumstances end; 12 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 768 of 810 4. Only keep and maintain data related to the exigent circumstances and dispose of any data that is not relevant to an ongoing investigation or the exigent circumstances; and 5. Following the end of the exigent circumstances, report the temporary acquisition or use of the surveillance technology for exigent circumstances to the Commission in accordance with Section II of this ordinance at its next meeting for discussion and possible recommendation to the City Council. C. Any surveillance technology acquired in accordance with exigent circumstances shall be returned within thirty (30) calendar days following when the exigent circumstances end, unless City staff initiates the process set forth for the use of the surveillance technology by submitting a Surveillance Use Policy and Surveillance Impact Report for Commission review within this 30-day time period. If City staff is unable to meet the 30-day deadline, City staff shall notify the City Council, who may grant an extension. In the event that City staff complies with the 30-day deadline or the deadline as may be extended by the City Council, City staff may retain possession of the surveillance technology, but may only use such surveillance technology consistent with the requirements of this Ordinance. Section V. Oversight Following City Council Approval A.Annual Surveillance Report 1. For each approved surveillance technology item, City staff shall present a written Annual Surveillance Report for the Commission to review within one year after the date of City Council final passage of such surveillance technology and annually thereafter as long as the surveillance technology is used. 2. If City staff is unable to meet the annual deadline, City staff shall notify the Commission in writing of staff’s request to extend this period, and the reasons for that request. The Commission may grant a single extension of up to sixty (60) calendar days to comply with this provision. 3. After review of the Annual Surveillance Report by the Commission, City staff shall submit the Report to the City Council. 4. The Commission shall recommend to the City Council: (a) that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology in question outweigh the costs and that civil liberties and civil rights are safeguarded; (b) that use of the surveillance technology cease; or (c) propose modifications to the corresponding Surveillance Use Policy that will resolve any identified concerns. 5. If the Commission does not make its recommendation on the item within 90 calendar days of submission of the Annual Surveillance Report to the Commission Chair, City staff may proceed to the City Council for approval of the Annual Surveillance Report. B.Summary Of All Requests And Recommendations And City Council Determination 13 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 769 of 810 1. In addition to the above submission of any Annual Surveillance Report, City staff shall provide in its report to the City Council a summary of all requests for City Council approval pursuant to Section III for that particular surveillance technology and the pertinent Commission recommendation, including whether the City Council approved or rejected the proposal and/or required changes to a proposed Surveillance Use Policy before approval. 2. Based upon information provided in the Annual Surveillance Report and after considering the recommendation of the Commission, the City Council shall revisit its cost benefit” analysis as provided in Section III(B)(2) and either uphold or set aside the previous determination. Should the City Council set aside its previous determination, the City’s use of the surveillance technology must cease. Alternatively, City Council may require modifications to a particular Surveillance Use Policy that will resolve any concerns with the use of a particular surveillance technology. Section VI. Enforcement A.Violations of this article are subject to the following remedies: 1. Any material violation of this Ordinance, or of a Surveillance Use Policy promulgated pursuant to this Ordinance, constitutes an injury and any person may institute proceedings for injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or writ of mandate in the Superior Court of the State of California to enforce this Ordinance. An action instituted under this paragraph shall be brought against the City of Chula Vista and, if necessary, to effectuate compliance with this Ordinance or a Surveillance Use Policy (including to expunge information unlawfully collected, retained, or shared thereunder), any other governmental agency with possession, custody, or control of data subject to this Ordinance, to the extent permitted by law. 2. Any person who has been subjected to the use of surveillance technology in material violation of this Ordinance, or of a material violation of a Surveillance Use Policy, or about whom information has been obtained, retained, accessed, shared, or used in violation of this Ordinance or of a Surveillance Use Policy promulgated under this Ordinance, may institute proceedings in the Superior Court of the State of California against the City of Chula Vista and shall be entitled to recover actual damages (but not less than liquidated damages of $1,000 or $100 per day for each day of violation, whichever is greater). 3. A court may award costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the plaintiff who is the prevailing party in an action brought under paragraphs A(1) and A(2) under Section VI above. 14 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 770 of 810 Section VII. Contract for Surveillance Technology A.Contracts and agreements for surveillance technology 1. It shall be unlawful for the City to enter into any contract or other agreement for surveillance technology that conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance. Any conflicting provisions in any such contract or agreements, including but not limited to non-disclosure agreements, shall be deemed void and legally unenforceable. Any amendment or exercise of any option to any contract to obtain or use surveillance technology shall require City staff to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. 2. To the extent permitted by law, the City shall publicly disclose all of its surveillance contracts, including any and all related non-disclosure agreements, if any, regardless of any contract terms to the contrary. Section VIII. Whistleblower Protections A. Neither the City nor anyone acting on behalf of the City may take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant for employment, including but not limited to discriminating with respect to compensation, terms and conditions of employment, access to information, restrictions on due process rights, or civil or criminal liability, because: 1. The employee or applicant was perceived to, about to, or assisted in any lawful disclosure of information concerning the funding, acquisition, or use of a surveillance technology or surveillance data based upon a good faith belief that the disclosure evidenced a violation of this Ordinance; or 2. The employee or applicant was perceived to, about to, had assisted in or had participated in any proceeding or action to carry out the purposes of this Ordinance. B. It shall be grounds for disciplinary action for a City employee or anyone else acting on behalf of the City to retaliate against another City employee or applicant who makes a good-faith complaint that there has been a failure to comply with any Surveillance Use Policy or administrative instruction promulgated under this Ordinance. C. Any employee or applicant who is injured by a violation of this Section may institute a proceeding for monetary damages and injunctive relief against the City in any court of competent jurisdiction. 15 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 771 of 810 Section IX. Review of Existing Surveillance Use Policies and Adoption as Ordinances A. Surveillance technology is considered existing if the City possessed, used, or has a contract in force and effect for the use of surveillance technology, or any resulting data, on the effective date of this Ordinance. B. The requirement for City staff to present a list of all existing surveillance technology and, once ranked, to seek monthly Commission review and approval for the use of existing surveillance technology shall begin within sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Ordinance. C. As per Section II, City staff shall return to City Council with an ordinance or ordinances for adoption and codification under the Chula Vista Municipal Code of all Surveillance Use Policies, but only after proper Commission and City Council review of any Surveillance Use Policies for existing surveillance technology, and with a 15-day public notice period in each instance to allow the public to prepare and participate in the meetings. Section X. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. Section XI. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section XII. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. 16 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 772 of 810 Section XIII. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by Maria Kachadoorian Glen R Googins City Manager City Attorney 17 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 773 of 810 Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance Revised - July 15, 2022) ORDINANCE NO. _________________ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE CHULA VISTA PRIVACY ADVISORY COMMISSION PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS THEREOF, AND DEFINING THE DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF SAID COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council (City Council) finds that the use of surveillance technology is important to protect public health and safety, but such use must be appropriately monitored and regulated to protect the privacy and other rights of Chula Vista residents and visitors, and WHEREAS the City of Chula Vista (the City) has been building on a detailed Smart City Strategic Action Plan since 2017 with limited opportunity for community input, oversight or control; and WHEREAS Chula Vista seeks to maintain its designation by Welcoming America as a certified Welcoming City, City Council strives to comply with the criteria in the Welcoming Standard, in particular, relevant criteria relating to “Safe Communities”, “Equitable Access”, and Civic Engagement”; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the use of open data associated with surveillance technology offers benefits to the City, but those benefits must also be weighed against the costs, both fiscal and civil liberties; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that surveillance technology may be a valuable tool to support community safety, investigations, and prosecution of crimes, but must be balanced with the individual’s right to privacy, it also; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that privacy is not just a personal matter; there are societal consequences to privacy degradation over time as well as societal benefits with increased trust and transparency; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that surveillance technology includes not just technology capable of accessing non-public places or information, but also may include technology that aggregates publicly-available information, which, in the aggregate or when 1 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 774 of 810 pieced together with other information, has the potential to reveal details about a person’s familial, political, professional, religious, or intimate associations; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that government surveillance may chill associational and expressive freedoms; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that data from surveillance technology can be used to intimidate and oppress certain groups more than others, including those that are defined by a common race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, income level, sexual orientation, or political perspective; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that safeguards, including robust transparency, oversight, and accountability measures, must be in place to protect civil rights and civil liberties before City surveillance technology is deployed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that decisions regarding if and how the City’s surveillance technologies should be funded, acquired, or used should include meaningful public input; and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, City Council unanimously approved creation of a Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force” to draft policy and recommendations to be presented to the City Council for consideration, and further requested that the City Administration prepare a “Citywide Technology Oversight Policy”; and WHEREAS, the said Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force recommends creation of a new permanent citizen advisory board known as the “Privacy Advisory Commision” to advise the Mayor and City Council on transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and usage of surveillance technology and data; and WHEREAS, Article VI, Section 600 of the City Charter reserves to the City Council the authority to create boards and commissions by ordinance, and to prescribe their function, powers, duties, membership, appointment, terms, qualifications, eligibility, reimbursements for expenses, if any; NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: Section I. Establishment A.Establishment and Appropriations Pursuant to Article VI of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista, there is hereby created a Chula Vista Privacy Advisory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Privacy Commission” or “Commission”). Appropriations of funds sufficient for the efficient and proper functioning of the Privacy Commission shall be included in the annual budget by the City Council. 2 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 775 of 810 B.Purpose and Intent It is the purpose and intent of the City Council to establish a Privacy Commission to serve as an advisory body to the Mayor and City Council on policies and issues related to privacy and surveillance. The Commission will provide advice intended to ensure transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. C.Definitions For purposes of this ordinance, all words defined in the CVMC Chapter XXXX, known as the Chula Vista Surveillance and Community Safety Ordinance, have the same meaning herein. D.Membership The Privacy Advisory Commission shall consist of nine (9) members, who shall serve without compensation. At least six (6) members shall be Chula Vista residents. Members shall be appointed by the City Council. E.Qualifications of Members All members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall be persons who have a demonstrated interest in privacy rights through work experience, civic participation, and/or political advocacy. The City Council shall appoint the nine (9) members from the following representative areas of organization interest, expertise, and background: 1. At least one attorney or legal scholar with expertise in privacy or civil rights, or a representative of an organization with expertise in privacy or civil rights; 2. One auditor or certified public accountant; 3. One computer hardware, software, or encryption security professional; 4. One member of an organization that focuses on open government and transparency or an individual, such as a university researcher, with experience working on open government and transparency; and 5. At least four (4) members from equity-focused organizations serving or protecting the rights of communities and groups historically subject to disproportionate surveillance, including communities of color, immigrant communities, religious minorities, and groups concerned with privacy and protest. Member qualifications and eligibility shall be in accordance with Chula Vista Charter Article VI, Section 602, and CVCM Section 2.25.030. No member shall have a state law-prohibited financial interest, employment, or policy-making position in any commercial or for-profit facility, research center, or other organization that sells data products, surveillance equipment, or otherwise profits from recommendations made by the Privacy Advisory Commission. F.Terms 3 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 776 of 810 Pursuant to Article VI, Section 602 of the City Charter, members shall be appointed by motion of the City Council adopted by at least three affirmative votes. The members thereof shall serve for a term of four (4) years and until their respective successors are appointed and confirmed. Members shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) consecutive terms and an interval of two (2) years must pass before a person who has served two (2) consecutive terms may be reappointed to the body upon which the member had served. Initial members shall be appointed in staggered terms by lot. For the initial appointments, three (3) members shall be appointed to an initial term that will expire on June 30, 2023, and two (2) members shall be appointed to an initial term that will expire on June 30 of each subsequent year. Initial appointments to a term of two years or less shall not have the initial term count for purposes of the eight-year term limit. G.Rules The Commission shall hold regular meetings as required by ordinance of the City Council, and such special meetings as such commissions may require. All proceedings shall be open to the public. At the first regular meeting, and subsequently at the first regular meeting of each year following the first day of July of every year, members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall select a chairperson and a vice chairperson. The Commission shall adopt rules for the government of its business and procedures in compliance with the law. The Commission rules shall provide that a quorum of the Privacy Advisory Commission is five people. Pursuant to Article VI, Section 603 of the City Charter, the Commission shall have the same power as the City Council to compel the attendance of witnesses, to examine them under oath and to compel the production of evidence before it. Section II. Privacy Advisory Commission: Duties and Functions A.Duties and Functions The Privacy Advisory Commission shall: 1. Provide advice and technical assistance to the City on best practices to protect resident and visitor privacy rights in connection with the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. 2. Conduct meetings and use other public forums to collect and receive public input on the above subject matter. 3. Review Surveillance Impact Reports and Surveillance Use Policies for all existing and new surveillance technology and make recommendations prior to the City seeking solicitation of funds and proposals for surveillance technology. 4. Submit annual reports and recommendations to the City Council regarding: 4 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 777 of 810 a. The City’s use of surveillance technology; and b. Whether new City surveillance technology privacy and data retention policies should be developed, or existing policies should be amended. c. Provide analysis to the City Council of pending federal, state, and local legislation relevant to the City’s purchase and/or use of surveillance technology. d. The Privacy Advisory Commission shall make reports, findings, and recommendations either to the City Manager or the City Council, as appropriate. The Commission shall present an annual written report to the City Council. The Commission may submit recommendations to the City Council following submission to the City Manager. B.Meetings and Voting The Commission shall meet at an established regular interval, day of the week, time, and location suitable for its purpose. Such meetings shall be designated regular meetings. Other meetings scheduled for a time or place other than the regular day, time and location shall be designated special meetings. Written notice of special meetings shall be provided to the Commission members, and all meetings of the Commission shall comport with any City or State open meetings laws, policies, or obligations. The Commission shall, in consultation with the City Manager, establish bylaws, rules and procedures for the conduct of its business by a majority vote of the members present. Voting shall be required for the adoption of any motion or resolution. Any action by the Commission shall be approved by a majority of members present, provided a quorum exists. C.Staff Staff assistance may be provided to the Board as determined by the City Manager, pursuant to his or her authority under the Charter to administer all affairs of the City under his or her jurisdiction. Section III. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. 5 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 778 of 810 Section IV. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section V. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. Section VI. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by:Approved as to form by Maria Kachadoorian Glen R. Googins City Manager City Attorney 6 Item #8.1 - Written Communications Baker - Received 11/1/2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 779 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy Presentation to the Chula Vista City Council Nov. 1, 2022 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 780 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Selection Process for Task Force November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 2 February 2022 •Application live for 30 days •57 applications submitted March 2022 •Committee of three community leaders narrowed applicants down to 21 April 2022 •City Manager interviewed candidates and selected 12 to serve on Task Force 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 781 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Community Leaders Selection Committee November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 3 •Beatrice Zamora, former college dean, children’s book author and Chula Vista resident •Dr. Francisco Escobedo, Executive Director at the National Center For Urban School Transformation •Arnulfo Manriquez, CEO at MAAC 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 782 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Technology and Privacy Policy Task Force Members November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 4 Sophia Rodriguez, Chair, Human Services Specialist Rafal Jankowski, Co-Chair, Information Technology and Information Security Expert Petrina Branch, Attorney and Human Relations Commission Representative Mae Case, Non-profit and Community Advocate Carlos De La Toba, Retired Federal Law Enforcement Officer Dominic LiMandri, Small Business Representative Lucia Napolez, Digital Marketing Art Pacheco, Engineering Vice President Pedro Rios, Civil and Human Rights Advocate Patricia Ruiz, Academic Research Scientist Charles Walker, Database Administrator and Information Technology Expert Maria Whitehorse, Social Services Worker 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 783 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 5 •12 residents / community members •Tech experts, social workers, academic researchers, small business, lawyer, retired law enforcement •12 meetings (April –September) •10 open public meetings •2 on-site tours and briefings •Briefings from 10 City Departments •Presentations from experts and community groups 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 784 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Thank you to… Task Force members, community participants, City staff, Executive Team, City Clerk, City Attorney and Madaffer Enterprises! November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 62022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 785 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Origin of the policy 2017 •Smart City Strategic Action Plan 2018 •Open Data Policy •Smart city marketing and communications 2019 -2020 •Traffic Signals Communications Master Plan •Citywide Telecommunications Master Plan •Data Governance Committee and Data Governance Standards •Digital Equity and Inclusion Plan 2021 -2022 •Refining technology privacy & oversight policies November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 72022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 786 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Purpose of the policy •Safeguard the security, accuracy, and control of access to City data and technology systems •Protect the civil rights and civil liberties of Chula Vista community members and visitors, including rights to privacy •Ensure that expert advice and community input are included as part of City decision-making involving the acquisition and use of technology •Protect against the waste of taxpayer funds •Promote transparency in the acquisition and use of technology •Build and maintain public trust in the City and its use of technology November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 82022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 787 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Project scope January 2022 City Council direction: •Public opinion survey and focus groups •Gather information from City staff •Community meetings and presentations •Communicate policy development to the public •Draft a policy November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 92022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 788 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Public input and community engagement •36+ hours of open, public meetings •Broadcast and archived online •Agendas posted 72 hours in advance •Dedicated website and email inbox •chulavistaca.gov/privacytaskforce •privacytaskforce@chulavistaca.gov •Updates sent to City email subscriber lists •Public updates via social media, City newsletter, news media November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 102022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 789 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Public opinion survey Sample size: 607 residents Languages: English, Spanish, Tagalog Population: All adult residents, including registered voters and non-voters Modes: Live telephone interview; online survey via email and text message Margin of error: +/-4% Confidence level: 95 percent November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 112022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 790 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Public opinion survey –key findings •More than half of residents believe things in Chula Vista are “moving in the right direction” •27% say things have “gotten off on the wrong track” •Residents more confident in City’s ability to protect personal information than in federal government or online businesses •56% express confidence but most residents have some reservations •85% of residents said it was important that the City adopt “a new privacy protection policy to make the City’s use of new technologies transparent and efficient” •70% said this was “very” or “extremely” important •77% of residents approve of the City using live video cameras on traffic signals to improve traffic flow and safety November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 122022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 791 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Public opinion survey –key findings •Most residents trust the Chula Vista Police Department “a lot” or “somewhat” •26 percent of residents say they trust CVPD “not much” or “not at all” •Most residents (77%) approve of the drone program (42% strongly approve) •17% disapprove, many citing privacy concerns, potential for misuse •Most residents (63%) approve of Automated License Plate Readers •31% disapprove, many citing potential for misuse, privacy concerns November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 132022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 792 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Focus Groups & Community Meetings •Six focus groups •Four in English, two in Spanish •45 participants •90 minutes each •Two community meetings •South Chula Vista Library •Otay Ranch Branch Library •Over 50 attendees •90 minutes each November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 142022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 793 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Information-gathering and City department briefings •Briefings from 10 city departments •On-site tour: Chula Vista Police Department •Follow-up conversations and 90 question Q&A document •On-site tour: Traffic Management Center •Special presentation by Pegah Parsi, Chief Privacy Officer at UC San Diego •Educational presentations by Madaffer Enterprises •Special presentation by ad-hoc community coalition November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 152022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 794 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Summary of 37 Task Force Recommendations •Establish a Privacy Advisory Board •Hire a Chief Privacy Officer •Provide enhanced privacy training for City staff •Require City Council review of privacy-related contracts •Create written Use Policies to govern the use of technology •Prepare impact reports for technologies with privacy impacts •Provide annual reports on the use of technology with privacy impacts •Prohibit the sale of data and limit data sharing with third parties •Establish a strong information security policy November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 162022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 795 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy •Privacy and Technology Advisory Commission •Support from Privacy and Technology Experts •Use Policies •Surveillance Technology Impact Reports (STIR) •Surveillance Technology Acquisition Process •Transparency in the Use of Sensitive and Surveillance Technology •Data Collection, Retention, Sharing and Management •Information Security •Exceptions •Training, Compliance and Enforcement of the Policy and Compliance with Laws November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 172022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 796 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Key definitions November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 182022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 797 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Key definitions November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 192022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 798 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Key definitions November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 202022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 799 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Key definitions November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 212022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 800 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Types of technology used by the City November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 22 *Staff intends to process as “surveillance technology” in the interest of transparency General Technology •Minimal privacy concerns •Examples: •Standard business technology (email, mobile devices, etc.) Sensitive Technology •Involves sensitive personal information, but not used for surveillance •Examples: •Drones in engineering •Traffic signal cameras •Drone as first responder* Surveillance Technology •Specifically used for surveillance •Examples: •Automated license plate reader systems (ALPR) 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 801 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Technology acquisition & review processes November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 23 General Technology General Use Policy Sensitive Technology Individual Use Policy City Website Surveillance Technology Individual Use Policy Impact Report Privacy Commission City Council City Website Usage Report 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 802 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Increased oversight and transparency •Prohibition of sale of City data •Establishing a Council Privacy and Technology Advisory Commission •Providing a privacy advisor to assist City staff and the Commission •Report every 2 years on surveillance technology usage •Post information (use policies, impact reports, usage reports) on City website •City Council approval for all surveillance technology acquisitions November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 242022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 803 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Exceptions •Waiver by City Manager or City Council •Only when circumstances make compliance impossible or infeasible •Interagency task force activities •Only to the extent of work on the interagency task force •Exigent circumstance •Must be authorized by City Manager or designee •Must be reported to City Council November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 252022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 804 of 810 CHULA VISTA, CA Next steps •Council to establish Privacy and Technology Advisory Commission •City Manager to establish internal Technology Governance Committee •Establish internal process for classifying technology •City Manager and Commission to elaborate on requirements for video feed access November 1, 2022 Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy 262022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 805 of 810 OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL JILL GALVEZ MEMO October 26, 2022 TO:Kerry Bigelow, City Clerk CC:Sherry Kansas, Deputy City Clerk III FROM:Councilmember Jill Galvez RE:Board and Commission Appointment Councilmember Galvez would like to recommend Lea Cruz for appointment to the Measure A Oversight Committee as the District 2 Representative. Lea Cruz will replace former District 2 Representative Pedro Anaya. Please place this item on the November 1, 2022 Council agenda for ratification and schedule the oath of office for the following council meeting. Thank you. 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 806 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 807 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 808 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 809 of 810 2022/11/01 City Council Post Agenda Page 810 of 810