Now that the year-long process of establishing a Police Surveillance Advisory Board in Vallejo is drawing to a close, it is time to turn our attention to seating members on this board. Vallejo is a small city, with only 141,000 people, and the SAB is an important first step in changing the culture from police impunity to one of oversight and civic empowerment. The SAB is advisory and is charged with guiding the City Council regarding the acquisition and use of surveillance equipment and technology, collecting public input from Vallejo residents and recommending policies and legislation regarding such use. Each City Council member appoints one member to the body and it meets as often as needed but no less than bimonthly.
Each Council district in Vallejo represents approximately 20,000 people, so people who live in Vallejo who care about privacy protections, civil rights, law enforcement overreach, and civilian oversight should seriously consider if they can throw their hat into the ring to help this SAB get off to a good start. The SAB has the ability to consult experts for assistance in crafting their recommendations and advice, and will have our support as well as that of the ACLU and others.
Oakland Privacy has no official role in City of Vallejo operations, so we can’t speak to the formal application process at this point, but we encourage interested community members to touch base with their elected council member to express their interest and to ask how to apply. All potential members will participate in a public Q+A at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council.
Useful backgrounds and experiences:
- Being an impacted person who has experienced being watched and targeted by law enforcement or is closely adjacent to individuals or communities who have
- Understanding or being willing to learn about technology and how surveillance tech works
- Familiarity with city processes from attending or watching Council meetings
- Ability to share thoughts and experiences in a group that may contain divergent viewpoints and work towards consensus.
If you’re interested, read our blog for more information about how the SAB came to be.
Oakland Privacy is happy to have a dialogue about the SAB and what to expect – reach out to us at contact@oaklandprivacy.org.
——————————————————————-
Update: The Vallejo City Council unanimously votes in support of a set of amendments championed by Oakland Privacy, ACLU-Solano County Chapter and assorted community groups to strengthen the founding ordinance for the Surveillance Advisory Board.
Update: October 30: Despite the unanimous votes in September, the inclusion of very loose exigency language from the Vallejo Police Department from the dais upset and alarmed community members, who pressed for corrective amendments. Mayor Robert McConnell pledged to pursue those amendments.
On November 16, the Vallejo City Council will consider several amendments to the founding ordinance to establish the Surveillance Advisory Board that will tighten loopholes and clarify ambiguities. We need all privacy-minded folks to speak up in solidarity with Vallejo residents to make sure these amendments are adopted. See below for specifics on the proposed amendments.
On September 14, Vallejo’s city council unanimously approved the first reading of an ordinance establishing a citizens Surveillance Advisory Board for the city. Vallejo’s board will be the second independent city commission advising on matters of privacy and surveillance in the U.S., after the Oakland commission which was set up in 2015-2016.
The City of Vallejo, whose police department has garnered national coverage for a high rate of lethal police-citizen encounters and a large number of police misconduct lawsuits, has announced that their police department will be attempting to transition to more “high-tech” policing. That transition has seen the rapid acquisition of more automated license plate readers, closed circuit cameras, and drones, as well as an unauthorized Clearview AI facial recognition trial, and in 2020, the purchase of a cell site simulator.
Oakland Privacy sued the City of Vallejo, successfully, to enforce state law (Section 53166) that requires a public hearing and council vote of approval on the usage policy for a cell site simulator. Following the lawsuit, Oakland Privacy (and ACLU) submitted comments and implemented several changes to the privacy. After Oakland Privacy went through the same process for the city’s automated license plate reader policy and suggested and implemented over a dozen changes to that policy. OP and ACLU pitched a citizens advisory board to the council that would regularize the review process and house it within the Vallejo community.
Each of Vallejo’s seven council members will appoint one member to the commission, and the commission will have support staff, the ability to consult with outside experts and follow all Brown Act requirements. Vallejo’s commission is advisory-only to the Council, but it is expected that acquisitions of equipment and policy documents will be routed through the commission.
Summary of Proposed November 16 Amendments
1) Allowing outside experts like us, EFF, ACLU, academics, researchers, lawyers to participate in discussions or present to the board as long as they do so free of charge.
2) Making sure the board is consulted before the adoption of any new or modified policies for surveillance equipment use or activities.
3) Confirming that exigent use in an emergency must be reported to the board for a revew no later than 30 days after use. (getting rid of a vague “as soon as possible”).
4) A definition of what “privileged” information means that restricts it to items covered by attorney client privilege (relating to what information the board can ask for).
5) A prohibition on board appointees being former employees of a law enforcement agency
6) Interviews for seats on the board held at a public meeting
7) Members of the public have the legal right to pursue enforcement of the terms of the ordinance if violated.
8) Preventing cancellation of board meetings without the explicit permission of the chair and vice-chair of the board.