San Diego Rules Committee Meeting: Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance, July 22, 2020
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Diego Rules Committee Meeting: Privacy Advisory Commission Ordinance, July 22, 2020
The San Diego City Council Rules Committee met on July 22, 2020, at 10:00 AM, via teleconference due to the COVID-19 state of emergency (Executive Order N-29-20). The committee considered a single discussion item: a proposal to establish a Privacy Advisory Commission, which would provide oversight and community input on the acquisition and use of surveillance technology by the city. The meeting was chaired by Council President Georgette Gómez. After extensive public comment and deliberation, the committee voted 5-0-2 to direct the City Attorney to draft the ordinance for full council consideration.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Over 39 callers queued for public comment, with a one-minute limit per speaker. The vast majority expressed strong support for the Privacy Advisory Commission, citing concerns about mass surveillance, lack of transparency, and disproportionate impacts on communities of color, immigrants, and activists.
- Key speakers included:
- Megan Land (Executive Director, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse) – supported the commission and offered expertise.
- Alfredo Cusack (criminal defense attorney) – criticized the City Attorney, alleging conflicts of interest and obstruction.
- Paloma (Mid City CAN) – urged support, emphasizing the need for oversight before deployment.
- Neema Ghan-Afshan (co-founder, Borderlands for Equity) – highlighted risks to Muslim and minority communities.
- Lauren Brown (UCSD Office of Local Affairs) – supported the commission as crucial for public input.
- Carmela Prudencio (Asian Solidarity Collective) – urged council to control surveillance measures.
- Kevin Lorenz (San Diego Progressive Democratic Club) – stressed that white council members may not experience consequences.
- Fadilma Abdul Kadir (SDSU student) – supported for good governance.
- Ariana Federico (Mid City CAN Youth Council) – called for community voice in policy.
- Kelly Gates (UCSD faculty) – emphasized civil rights protections.
- Mario Vencos (Defend School SD) – argued impacted communities need a seat at the table.
- Jacqueline Magazine (Mid City CAN Youth Council) – said San Diegans are not lab rats.
- Aisha Osman (youth organizer) – said building trust requires public involvement.
- We Tran (We the People) – advocated against financial conflicts of interest.
- Ismahan Abdullahi (MAS San Diego) – stressed need for expertise.
- David Loy (ACLU of San Diego/Imperial Counties) – said no legal reason to delay; advisory board allowed by charter.
- Melanie Ortiz (Mid City CAN Youth Council) – supported for control over surveillance.
- Lisa LeVasseur (Meetabee Alliance) – described commission as a needed light.
- Magdalena Dania (UCSD PhD student, tech worker) – shared personal experience of surveillance.
- John Mattis (Hillcrest Indivisible) – referenced the Smart Streetlights program as example of oversight failure.
- Christina Capella (District 7 resident) – supported to prevent future violations.
- Janai (Defund Police SD youth organizer) – said trust requires community organizations.
- Aaron Sermonograssi (District 7 resident) – described surveillance near his home.
- Patrine McShane (Change Begins with Me/Indivisible) – supported for good governance.
- Cody Oze (Mid City CAN) – said tech, legal, and community experts must deliberate.
- Shakriya (youth organizer) – said surveillance harms minority communities.
- Alina June Wabi (CAIR) – said ordinances prevent bad contracts.
- Blair Uberstreet (Showing Up for Racial Justice) – highlighted targeting of Black and brown communities.
- Yvan Sillas Navarro (People Over Profit San Diego) – demanded community voices.
- Peg Al Parsi (UC San Diego privacy officer) – said privacy linked to civil liberties.
- Ramon Espinan (teacher, District 9 resident) – supported to prevent abuses.
- Sandra Lovato (San Diego Border Dreamers) – supported.
- Sarah Kennedy (Indivisible San Diego Persist) – supported.
- Wendy Galenter (Pacific Beach Democratic Club) – supported for transparency.
- Weston (Youth Will organizer) – said surveillance disproportionately affects Black, brown, Muslim communities.
- Tadija (youth organizer) – also noted disproportionate surveillance.
- Dulce Garcia (Border Angels) – as an undocumented immigrant, cited grave consequences for data sharing.
- Candy (Asian Solidarity Collective/Trust SD) – said organizers and BIPOC communities are under surveillance.
- Ashley Solace (The Utility Reform Network, District 6) – supported.
- Darwin Fishman (Racial Justice Coalition) – said harm already done to minority communities, ICE involvement.
- Matthew Bostilakis (Climate Action Campaign) – supported as proven model.
- Cameron Toe (UCSD student) – supported.
- Andrea Spadam (Center on Policy Initiative, District 8) – supported for democratic oversight.
- Abby Reuters (UCSD Associated Students) – supported.
- Brenda Piazza (IT audit/cybersecurity director) – supported, cited need for data protection.
- Dan Stephon (UCSD computer science professor) – supported, said tech experts can help.
- No speakers opposed the ordinance during this period.
Discussion Items
- Proposal of an Ordinance Establishing the Privacy Advisory Commission: Presented by Hamira Yousafy (Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans) and Seth Hall (Trust SD coalition). They argued that the commission would provide technical expertise, community input, and annual review of surveillance technologies, citing the Smart Streetlights program as an example of cost overruns, mission creep, and lack of transparency. The commission would consist of nine members: four community experts from equity-focused organizations and four subject-matter experts (e.g., legal, technology, open government), with no financial conflicts of interest. A 90-day review process for new proposals and a monthly review of existing technology were outlined.
- Councilmember Monica Montgomery moved to direct the City Attorney to draft the ordinance, with amendments: (1) require at least seven of nine commission members to be San Diego residents (instead of six), and (2) remove specific mention of ACLU in Section 4G1 to avoid singling out an organization. She emphasized need for local representation.
- Councilmember Christopher Ward raised technical questions: requested a clause for periodic review of the ordinance, suggested flexibility in the 90-day timeline given initial workload, and recommended stronger language for staff assistance (changing “may” to “shall”). He expressed support for the motion and noted the value of a commission for ongoing outside perspective.
- City Attorney Sharon Spivack acknowledged the amendments and stated they would be considered during drafting.
- Council President Pro Tempore (Barbara Bry) and Councilmember (likely Chris Cate) voted affirmatively without additional comments.
Key Outcomes
- Motion passed 5-0-2 (Councilmembers Gómez, Bry, Ward, Montgomery, and Kerch voted yes; two councilmembers were absent or not voting—likely due to teleconference participation). The exact vote tally: Council President Gómez (yes), Councilmember Pro Tempore Bry (yes), Councilmember Ward (yes), Councilmember Montgomery (yes), Councilmember Kerch (yes). Two members (Councilmember Bree and another) were on teleconference but their votes were not explicitly recorded in the transcript? The roll call showed unanimous approval: “Council President Portemore. I vote yes. Councilmember Ward. Councilmember Montgomery. A vote yes. Councilmember Kercy. Yes. Ruth, please call the role. That passes unanimously.” However, earlier roll call for approval of minutes had all present voting. For the motion, the chair stated “the motion passes five two zero.” This likely indicates five votes in favor, two absent/not voting, zero opposed.
- Directive: The City Attorney’s office, in coordination with Council District 4 (Montgomery) and the Office of Boards and Commissions, will conduct legal analysis and draft the ordinance language, considering the policy direction from the Public Safety and Livable Neighborhoods Committee and the Rules Committee. The draft will be forwarded to the full City Council for consideration.
- The next Rules Committee meeting was scheduled for September 30, 2020, at 2:00 PM.
- Non-agenda public comment: No callers participated; the period closed with no comments.
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon. For executive order twenty-nine-twenty, which suspends certain requirements of the Brown Act. Some of the council members will be participating via teleconference, and no members of the public will be in attendance at this meeting in the interest of public health and safety. In addition, this meeting is being televised and live stream on the city's website, and the council committee liaison have made arrangements for the public to comment via telephone as well as electronically. We appreciate the public's cooperation. I will now call the rules committee meeting of Wednesday, July 22, 2020 to order. We have several members of the committee and staff calling via teleconference where they will be participating in this meeting remotely. Ruth, please proceed. So for purposes of the roll call, those on the teleconference include Councilmember Bree, Councilmember Montgomery, and Councilmember Kirsi. Council members present in chambers are Councilmember Ward, Council President Gomez. We also in chambers have sorry in commuter committee room. We have independent budget analyst uh Jeff Kawar and we have Joel Day from the Office of Ports and Commissions. Um and also on the teleconference line is City Attorney Sharon Speedback. Uh for purposes of this meeting, written comments submitted using the public comment form prior to the start of the meeting have been distributed to the council and posted online. All written submissions received after the start of the meeting will be made a part of the permanent record. Those comments will no longer be read into the record because we now are able to provide for phone-in live testimony from the public. The public may call in following the instructions posted on the agenda by calling 619-541-6310 and entering conference ID 877-861 pound to be placed in the queue for public comment. You should do this when the item you wish to speak on is introduced. When you hear the prompt, immediately state your name and make your comment, and each speaker will be given a minute to speak. This is not a question and answer period. This is your time to provide a statement to the council. Once you have concluded your statement within the allotted time, please hang up and um or your call will be ended. If you wish to provide comment on other items on the agenda, you should call back during those uh comment periods uh to be placed in the queue. Uh if you call in during a non-comment period, your call will not be taken. Please monitor the meeting and ensure you're calling at the appropriate time. Um we appreciate your patience and cooperation as we aim to provide the best possible access during this time. Um the public may view the meeting on public television on City TV channel 24 or Cox Communication in Time Warner Cable or Channel 99 for ATT, or view the meeting online by going to the City Clark homepage at Sandiego.gov and selecting the City Council Live West uh live webcast blue button on the right-hand side of the page. Thank you, Ruth. We now have a quorum. Um before we continue, I want to announce that I'm going to be taking items out of order today. We will be taking non agenda public comment at the end of the meeting. Anyone interested in com in commenting during the non-agenda public comment should monitor the meeting and call at after the appropriate time. We will now start with the approval of the committee records of action from June 10th, 2020. I'll make the motion to approve the records of action for June 10, 2020. Do we have a second? Councilmember Ward has seconded the motion. We will now go down the line. Council President Portemore. I vote yes. Councilmember Ward. Councilmember Montgomery. A vote yes. Councilmember Kercy. Yes. Ruth, please call the role. That passes unanimously. Thank you. Are there any committee comments? I hear none. Are there any comments for the from the city attorney, IBA, Mayor Staff?
openpublica.com