Last year, officials adopted a policy that governs how the city can use technology and protects residents' data collected by its surveillance equipment. It came in response to public concerns that data collected by the city's license plate reader program had been shared with federal immigration agencies, a practice that has been halted.
The policy guides data management processes and steps for acquiring new surveillance tools, which must undergo review by the Privacy and Technology Commission. A 12-member task force produced the policy, though not all their recommendations made it into the final version.
Details about their exact duties, who and how many would qualify and how often the group would meet came before the City Council on Tuesday.
In general, the commission would review new acquisitions and reports prepared by city staff on potential impacts the tools could have on the public and city systems, as well as facilitate public discussion. It would consist of five voting members and one ex-officio member, each of whom would need experience in areas such as public safety, cybersecurity or a legal background in privacy protection. The group would meet four times per year, according to the draft ordinance. The City Council would appoint members.
Privacy activists and former task members said the ordinance lacked teeth. They said the commission needs to have more members and meet monthly. Selected members, they added, should demonstrate their work experience in privacy protections, include underrepresented or vulnerable people and exclude those with possible conflicts of interest.
Sophia Rodriguez, who served as chair of the now-dissolved task force, said the ordinance needs "preventative measures." For example, the proposal said the commission would review and advise "on the procurement standards for agreements" involving technology.
"In the language that I understood from the current ordinance, the procurement already happened and then the commission takes a look at that," she said. "We want, before acquisitions start, that the commission takes a look at that and kind of advises to go forward with the purchase or go against that."
Chula Vista should consider following San Diego's Privacy Advisory Board, said its vice chair, Pegah Parsi.
"I urge you to reject the current proposal and instead create an empowered, independent and well-resourced commission," she said. "It will serve you very well in the future as new technologies come on board. A toothless board will not be seen as legitimate by the community and if it's not seen as legitimate, what is the point?"
Vice Mayor Jose Preciado had several suggestions for the ordinance based on community feedback, he said. Among them: the commission has seven voting members rather than five. They should have experience in contracting or public auditing and legal background in advocating for marginalized groups.
An updated version of the ordinance with Preciado's amendments will retrun for a vote in July.
©2023 The San Diego Union-Tribune, Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
