Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Anchorage Assembly Work Session on AO 2026 108: Surveillance Technology Restrictions – October 14, 2026

Assembly & Committee Meetings — Wednesday, October 14, 2026

BodyAnchorage, Alaska

SessionAssembly & Committee Meetings

DateWednesday, October 14, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 59:05

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Unassigned speaker

0:02

Okay,

Speaker 1

0:03

everyone, let's get this work session started.

0:05

Today is Wednesday, October 14th.

0:07

We are noticed from 2 to 3 p.m.

0:09

Uh, if we have a long discussion, we might go a little bit longer, but we'll uh deal with that when we get there.

0:14

Or this is a work session on AO 2026 108.

0:17

Uh, there is an S version, S1 version, some amendments.

0:20

We're here to discuss uh those versions and amendments.

0:23

I will turn it over to the sponsors after we do uh introduction.

0:26

So uh starting with members in the room.

Speaker 2

0:28

Donald Handelin.

Speaker 1

0:31

Sydney Scout,

Speaker 3

0:32

Daniel Voland.

Speaker 1

0:33

Anna Brawley.

0:34

Yara Silvers.

0:36

And then on the phone, I see uh Mr.

0:38

Martinez.

Speaker 4

0:40

Yes, thank you.

Speaker 1

0:41

Mr.

0:42

Johnson.

Speaker 4

0:44

I'm here, sir.

Speaker 1

0:45

Mr.

0:45

McCormick.

Speaker 4

0:48

Sure.

Speaker 1

0:49

And then uh so that's everybody uh here.

0:51

So we have members in the administration, uh Assembly Council, clerk's office, and uh a couple members of the public in the back.

0:57

And then I'll just note I know a couple members are out of town.

1:00

Um so hello, uh, as you are probably gonna be listening to the recording in the future.

1:03

Uh so with that, so again, we are here to discuss uh AO 2026 108 and its various versions and amendments.

1:10

Uh, this is regarding uh restrictions on surveillance technology and uh uh things related to uh APD technology and such.

1:19

Uh long title uh title has been changing, but uh we'll see that in the S versions.

1:23

So uh first I'm gonna turn it over to uh the underlying ordinance sponsors.

1:28

Um, just if you want to kind of set the table.

1:30

And then my understanding is today we're gonna be talking through questions on any of the any of these versions uh as well as amendments.

1:37

And then we had a work session on this.

1:39

Um, don't remember the date, but it was a couple weeks ago.

1:41

So I will turn to uh members McCormick Voland and Scout to kick us

Unassigned speaker

1:45

off.

Speaker 3

1:46

Okay, thank you, Chair.

1:48

Um, yeah, so uh we've thought we would just have the opportunity here today.

1:52

Um,

Unassigned speaker

1:53

you

Speaker 3

1:53

know, I I think uh recently we have had some large proposed policy changes um on other matters where there's been a slew of amendments coming in at the last minute, and um sometimes folks feel uh a little bit uh caught up guard or frustrated that they don't have um time to to process those things in advance of a decision point.

2:18

So um we just wanted to preview preview some amendments that we may be bringing forward.

2:23

Um we being myself, member scout, um, member McCormick, but also um allow others to do so as well, if there's ideas that they want to bring to the table or amendments that they want to preview, um, that they also can do so.

2:38

Um

Unassigned speaker

2:40

I

Speaker 3

2:40

guess I'll speak to a few.

2:42

Um you don't have printed copies in front of

Unassigned speaker

2:45

you.

Speaker 3

2:46

Um, but there's four amendments that um myself and member scout and member McCormick are going to be bringing forward to the S version that would essentially uh more closely align it with the S1 version.

3:01

So if if the S version, which is the mayor's version, um is the one that ends up getting moved.

3:08

Uh amendments that we plan to bring forward would be uh an amendment that would require warrants for sharing of information with other entities.

Unassigned speaker

3:18

We

Speaker 3

3:18

sort of talked about that when we had the work session and were able to contrast the different versions.

3:23

That would be our first amendment.

3:25

Um the second amendment would be to uh put in the in the S version also the language around um when uh DMV integration would be allowed at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

3:40

Um we also heard some uh feedback from the public, um, something that wasn't our original version, but is in neither the S nor the S1 was having a codified retention limit, how long data can be stored if it is not you know pertinent to an active investigation.

4:00

Um and then lastly removal of the language in the S version knowingly and willingly um that that that be a sort of a a predicate to um allow suspension of the system when there is a violation.

4:18

Um we we believe that language um that qualifying language is a little bit too high of a barrier for the assembly to say, hey, let's take a pause on this.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Technology and Innovation█████████████████████████████████████████████59%

Public Safety████████████████21%

Meeting Procedures████████████16%

Procedural███4%

Summary of Proceedings

Anchorage Assembly Work Session on AO 2026 108: Surveillance Technology Restrictions – October 14, 2026

The Anchorage Assembly held a work session on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, from 2:00 p.m. to approximately 3:10 p.m. to discuss AO 2026 108, an ordinance regarding restrictions on surveillance technology, and its various versions (S and S1) and proposed amendments. The meeting was called to preview amendments before the scheduled debate on October 20, 2026. No formal votes were taken.

Consent Calendar

No consent calendar items were considered.

Public Comments & Testimony

The public hearing on AO 2026 108 has been closed. No public testimony was taken during this work session, though a few members of the public were present.

Discussion Items

Overview by Sponsors: Member Voland introduced four amendments (numbers 6, 7, 9, and an unnamed one) that he, Member Scout, and Member McCormick plan to bring forward to align the mayor's S version with the S1 version. These amendments would: (1) require warrants for sharing information with other entities, (2) add language on DMV integration, (3) impose a codified data retention limit, and (4) remove the "knowingly and willingly" qualifier for technology suspension.
Charter Amendment Proposal: Member McCormick presented a charter amendment (McCormick amendment 1) that would add restrictions on surveillance technology to the municipal charter, including requiring warrants for tracking individuals over time, prohibiting the city from joining outside surveillance networks or purchasing bulk data, and banning biometric surveillance (facial recognition, gait tracking, lip reading, voice) except for close-proximity biometrics like fingerprints. The amendment excludes retention periods and does not affect license plate readers used for hot lists.
Discussion on Biometric Surveillance and Redaction: Member Silvers questioned whether the proposals would affect APD's ability to redact body camera and dash cam footage to protect privacy. Municipal Attorney Gardner and Member Voland offered differing interpretations of the language. McCormick clarified that the intent is to limit tracking across data sets, not prohibit redaction for transparency.
Additional Amendments: Chair Brawley presented four amendments (2–5) focused on: (2) narrowing allowed uses of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) to a specific list, (3) requiring assembly approval for vendor demonstrations and contracts, (4) specifying "judicial warrant" instead of just "warrant," and (5) prohibiting the use of signals surveillance technology (e.g., cell phone tracking) by the municipality and barring acceptance of evidence derived from it.
Legal Clarifications: Attorney Gardner noted potential unintended consequences, such as the broad definition of "surveillance technology" possibly prohibiting routine redaction, and implementation challenges for the signal surveillance ban without a "knowing" requirement. She also confirmed that a subpoena would qualify under "court order."
Process Questions: Members Handelin and Silvers asked about the procedural path for the charter amendment, including whether approval would require a supermajority and reopening the public hearing. It was clarified that if the amendment passes, the public hearing must be reopened and the item postponed for proper notice.
Member Positions: Supporters argued the amendments are proactive to protect privacy and guard against future technological abuse. Skeptics, including Member Silvers, raised concerns about balancing privacy with effective law enforcement investigations and the potential to hinder public access to video evidence.

Key Outcomes

No votes or final decisions were made. The work session served as a forum to preview and clarify amendments.
The ordinance and all proposed amendments are scheduled for debate on Tuesday, October 20, 2026. The order of the day may be adjusted to accommodate budget hearings.
Assembly leadership will determine the meeting order to allow sufficient time for discussion of AO 2026 108.
Members were encouraged to have offline conversations and to refine amendments before the next meeting.

Meeting Transcript

Okay, everyone, let's get this work session started. Today is Wednesday, October 14th. We are noticed from 2 to 3 p.m. Uh, if we have a long discussion, we might go a little bit longer, but we'll uh deal with that when we get there. Or this is a work session on AO 2026 108. Uh, there is an S version, S1 version, some amendments. We're here to discuss uh those versions and amendments. I will turn it over to the sponsors after we do uh introduction. So uh starting with members in the room. Donald Handelin. Sydney Scout, Daniel Voland. Anna Brawley. Yara Silvers. And then on the phone, I see uh Mr. Martinez. Yes, thank you. Mr. Johnson. I'm here, sir. Mr. McCormick. Sure. And then uh so that's everybody uh here. So we have members in the administration, uh Assembly Council, clerk's office, and uh a couple members of the public in the back. And then I'll just note I know a couple members are out of town. Um so hello, uh, as you are probably gonna be listening to the recording in the future. Uh so with that, so again, we are here to discuss uh AO 2026 108 and its various versions and amendments. Uh, this is regarding uh restrictions on surveillance technology and uh uh things related to uh APD technology and such. Uh long title uh title has been changing, but uh we'll see that in the S versions. So uh first I'm gonna turn it over to uh the underlying ordinance sponsors. Um, just if you want to kind of set the table. And then my understanding is today we're gonna be talking through questions on any of the any of these versions uh as well as amendments. And then we had a work session on this. Um, don't remember the date, but it was a couple weeks ago. So I will turn to uh members McCormick Voland and Scout to kick us off. Okay, thank you, Chair. Um, yeah, so uh we've thought we would just have the opportunity here today. Um, you know, I I think uh recently we have had some large proposed policy changes um on other matters where there's been a slew of amendments coming in at the last minute, and um sometimes folks feel uh a little bit uh caught up guard or frustrated that they don't have um time to to process those things in advance of a decision point. So um we just wanted to preview preview some amendments that we may be bringing forward. Um we being myself, member scout, um, member McCormick, but also um allow others to do so as well, if there's ideas that they want to bring to the table or amendments that they want to preview, um, that they also can do so. Um I guess I'll speak to a few. Um you don't have printed copies in front of you.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com