The County of Santa Clara
California

Report
94068

Receive updated Surveillance Technology Use Policies for various departments' existing surveillance technologies and provide direction to Administration relating to submission of the updated policies to the Board of Supervisors for receipt and/or approval. (Office of the County Executive) (Held from November 8, 2018, Finance and Government Operations Committee meeting, Item No. 6)

Information

Department:Office of the County ExecutiveSponsors:
Category:ReportProjects:Surveillance Technology

Attachments

  1. Office of the District Attorney - Data Extraction/Examination Forensic Tools and Software Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  2. Office of the District Attorney - Data Extraction/Examination Forensic Tools and Software Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  3. Office of the District Attorney - Digital Recorders Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  4. Office of the District Attorney - Digital Recorders Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  5. Office of the District Attorney - Global Positioning System Trackers Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  6. Office of the District Attorney - Global Positioning System Trackers Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  7. Office of the District Attorney - Night Vision Binoculars Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  8. Office of the District Attorney - Night Vision Binoculars Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  9. Office of the District Attorney - Third-Party Surveillance Technology Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  10. Office of the District Attorney - Third-Party Surveillance Technology Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  11. Office of the District Attorney - Video Surveillance and Recording of Evidence Storage Facility Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  12. Office of the District Attorney - Video Surveillance and Recording of Evidence Storage Facility Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  13. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Access Card and Biometric Fingerprint Systems Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  14. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Access Card and Biometric Fingerprint Systems Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  15. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Digital and Multimedia Evidence Unit (DMEU) Software and Hardware Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  16. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Digital and Multimedia Evidence Unit (DMEU) Software and Hardware Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  17. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Security Cameras Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  18. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Security Cameras Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  19. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Booking-Photograph Cameras Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  20. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Booking-Photograph Cameras Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  21. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Handheld Digital Cameras Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  22. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Handheld Digital Cameras Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  23. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Inmate Telephone Monitoring Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  24. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Inmate Telephone Monitoring Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  25. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Portable Digital Audio Recorders Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  26. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Portable Digital Audio Recorders Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  27. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Baby Match Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  28. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Baby Match Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  29. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Badge and Biometric Readers Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  30. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Badge and Biometric Readers Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  31. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - FairWarning Electronic Health Record Privacy Monitoring System Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  32. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - FairWarning Electronic Health Record Privacy Monitoring System Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  33. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Mobile Audio and Visual Recording Devices Surveillance Use Policy
  34. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Mobile Audio and Visual Recording Devices Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  35. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - NicView Camera Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  36. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - NicView Camera Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  37. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Professional Research Consultants Communication Technology Surveillance Use Policy
  38. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Security Cameras Used at SCVHHS Facilities Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  39. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Security Cameras Used at SCVHHS Facilities Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  40. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Telephonic and Voice Recording Equipment Surveillance Use Policy
  41. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Vocera Communication Technology Surveillance Use Policy
  42. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Vocera Communication Technology Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since Preliminary Submission in 2017)
  43. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Emergency Medical Services Agency - Mobile Area Routing and Vehicle Location Information System Surveillance Use Policy (November 2018)
  44. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Emergency Medical Services Agency - Mobile Area Routing and Vehicle Location Information System Surveillance Use Policy (Redlined Since 2017)

Multiple Recommendations

a. Office of the District Attorney - Data Extraction/Examination Forensic Tools and Software
b. Office of the District Attorney - Digital Recorders
c. Office of the District Attorney - Global Positioning System Trackers
d. Office of the District Attorney - Night Vision Binoculars
e. Office of the District Attorney - Third-Party Surveillance Technology
f. Office of the District Attorney - Video Surveillance and Recording of Evidence Storage Facility
g. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Access Card and Biometric Fingerprint Systems
h. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Digital and Multimedia Evidence Unit Software and Hardware
i. Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Security Cameras
j. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Booking-Photograph Cameras
k. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Handheld Digital Cameras
l. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Inmate Telephone Monitoring
m. Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Portable Digital Audio Recorders
n. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Baby Match Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center
o. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Badge and Biometric Readers
p. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - FairWarning Electronic Health Record Privacy Monitoring System
q. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Mobile Audio and Visual Recording Devices
r. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - NicView Camera Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center
s. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Professional Research Consultants Communication Technology
t. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Security Cameras Used at Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Facilities
u. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Telephonic and Voice Recording Equipment
v. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Vocera Communication Technology
w. Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Emergency Medical Services Agency - Mobile Area Routing and Vehicle Location Information System

Body

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no fiscal implications associated with the Committee’s receipt of Surveillance Technology Use Policies.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

On June 21, 2016 (Item No. 180), the Board of Supervisors (“Board”) unanimously approved final adoption of the Surveillance-Technology and Community-Safety Ordinance, which became effective July 21, 2016.  County departments prepared draft Surveillance-Technology Use Policies for existing technology (“Policies”) and preliminarily submitted those draft Policies to the Board of Supervisors in 2017At the request of the Finance and Government Operations Committee (“FGOC”), departments have worked with the Chief Privacy Officer and the Office of the County Counsel to revise and clarify the draft Policies.

The following draft Policies are under consideration as part of this report.  Prior to submission to FGOC, draft Policies are reviewed by the Chief Privacy Officer, and are approved by the Office of the County Counsel as to form and legality.  Following approval by the Office of the County Counsel, proposed Policies are also posted for public access and consideration on https://www.sccgov.org/sites/ceo/srtup/Pages/home.aspx.

·        Office of the District Attorney - Data Extraction/Examination Forensic Tools and Software

·        Office of the District Attorney - Digital Recorders

·        Office of the District Attorney - Global Positioning System Trackers

·        Office of the District Attorney - Night Vision Binoculars

·        Office of the District Attorney - Third-Party Surveillance Technology

·        Office of the District Attorney - Video Surveillance and Recording of Evidence Storage Facility

·        Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Access Card and Biometric Fingerprint Systems

·        Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Digital and Multimedia Evidence Unit Software and Hardware

·        Office of the District Attorney's Crime Laboratory - Security Cameras

·        Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Booking-Photograph Cameras

·        Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Handheld Digital Cameras

·        Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Inmate Telephone Monitoring

·        Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau - Portable Digital Audio Recorders

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Baby Match Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Badge and Biometric Readers

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - FairWarning Electronic Health Record Privacy Monitoring System

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Mobile Audio and Visual Recording Devices

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - NicView Camera Technology Used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Professional Research Consultants Communication Technology

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Security Cameras Used as Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Facilities

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Telephonic and Voice Recording Equipment

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System - Vocera Communication Technology

·        Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Emergency Medical Services Agency - Mobile Area Routing and Vehicle Location Information System

 

Since the impact of adopting these Policies may be subject to the meet and confer process with County labor organizations, the Labor Relations Department will provide notice of the updated draft Policies to the labor organizations, and, when requested, will meet with individual labor organizations over the potential impact of the Policies. Thereafter, Policies will be presented to the Board of Supervisors for consideration.

While most of these Policies may be presented to the Board for consideration in December 2018 or January 2019, Administration anticipates submitting to the Board in November 2018 the draft Policy for the Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System – Professional Research Consultants Communication Technology, as part of Administration’s recommendation to the Board to approve a new contract term with Professional Research Consultants.

CHILD IMPACT

The recommended action will provide parents, caregivers, and youth with information about surveillance technologies that may be used by the County.

SENIOR IMPACT

The recommended action will provide seniors and/or those who care for seniors with information about surveillance technologies that may be used by the County.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

The recommended action will have no/neutral sustainability implications.

BACKGROUND

On June 21, 2016 (Item No. 180), the Board unanimously approved final adoption of the Surveillance-Technology and Community-Safety Ordinance, which became effective July 21, 2016.  County departments with existing surveillance technology as of July 21, 2016, drafted a Policy for each technology.  Consistent with the Ordinance, each draft Policy is required to specify the purpose, authorized and prohibited uses, information/data that can be collected, data access, data protection, data retention, public access, third-party data sharing, training, and oversight mechanisms. 

The Board received the draft Policies at its January 10, 2017 (Item No. 21) and April 11, 2017 (Item No. 22) meetings.  One additional draft Policy for existing technology was submitted to the Board on May 9, 2017 (Item No. 16). Following preliminary submission to the Board, the Labor Relations Department provided notice of the proposed departmental Policies to the labor organizations, and, when requested, conducted meet and confers with individual labor organizations over the potential impact of the Policies.

At the August 10, 2017 (Item No. 5) FGOC meeting, Administration submitted a status report on the Policies, including the status of meetings with labor organizations.  FGOC requested that Administration submit the completed policies to FGOC in order to provide a forum for public and Committee discussion, prior to submittal to the Board of Supervisors.

Seventeen proposed Policies were submitted to the September 14, 2017 (Item No. 7) FGOC meeting.  FGOC requested that Administration and County Counsel work with departments to clarify and revise those and other draft Policies prior to further FGOC discussion. 

From May 2018 to the present, Administration has returned to FGOC with four groups of revised and clarified proposed Policies for the Committee’s consideration and public vetting and discussion, before submitting those proposed Policies to the Board as recommended by FGOC or as revised following FGOC input. 

Specifically, at the May 10 (Item No. 8), May 24 (Item No. 5), and June 14, 2018 (Item No. 5) FGOC meetings, the first group of seventeen Policies, all from the Sheriff’s Office, were agendized for FGOC discussion.  Most of those Policies were forwarded to the Board for consideration in August 2018.

At the June 14 (Item No. 6), August 23 (Item No. 7), September 13 (Item No. 6), and September 27, 2018 (Item No. 5) FGOC meetings, the second group of 18 additional Policies were agendized for FGOC consideration and discussion.  Those 18 policies related to Countywide technology and technology used by the Facilities and Fleet Department, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Department of Child Support Services, Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency, County Communications, Department of Parks and Recreation, Department of Planning and Development, Finance Agency, and Technology Services and Solutions.  All of those were forwarded to the Board for consideration in October 2018.

At the August 23 (Item No. 8) and October 11, 2018 (Item No. 5) FGOC meetings, the third group of 22 additional Policies were agendized for FGOC consideration and discussion relating to technology used by the Office of the Assessor, Office of the County Counsel, Office of the County Executive, Procurement Department, Registrar of Voters, Office of Pretrial Services, Office of the Medical Examiner-Coroner, Office of the Public Defender, Probation Department, Roads and Airports Department, and Social Services Agency.  FGOC directed that eleven of the policies return to FGOC with additional edits for consideration.  For the other eleven policies, FGOC recommended moving the policies forward to the Board for consideration, following review of two items in each policy by the Chief Privacy Officer and the Office of the County Counsel.

For this November 8 FGOC meeting, the fourth group of 23 additional Policies are agendized for FGOC consideration and discussion.

Administration and County Counsel anticipate returning to each FGOC meeting through December 2018, and Board meetings through January 2019, with updated draft Policies from County departments. 

CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION

The Committee would not receive the proposed Surveillance Technology Use Policies for discussion.

 

Meeting History

Nov 8, 2018 2:00 PM Video Finance and Government Operations Committee Regular Meeting
RESULT:HELD DUE TO LACK OF QUORUMNext: 11/29/2018 10:00 AM
Nov 29, 2018 10:00 AM Video Finance and Government Operations Committee Regular Meeting

Chairperson Simitian requested that Administration incorporate language into Office of the District Attorney surveillance technology use policies relating to global positioning system trackers, night vision binoculars, and third-party surveillance technology to clarify a reasonable expectation of privacy. Chairperson Simitian further requested that Administration identify the model numbers of surveillance technology utilized by the Office of the District Attorney to ensure proper use.

Chairperson Simitian requested that Administration report to the Committee on January 17, 2019 relating to the surveillance technology utilized by the Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System regarding baby match technology used at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center to capture, track, and store data.

The Committee requested that Administration include the Jail Observer Program within Office of the Sheriff Custody Bureau surveillance technology use policies relating to booking-photograph cameras, handheld digital cameras, and inmate telephone monitoring.

The Committee requested that Administration report to the Committee on January 17, 2019 relating to the need to cooperate with law enforcement inquiries while not sharing Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act protected information, including clarity regarding guidelines for function and privacy expectations in those environments.

The Committee held Item Nos. 4c, 4d, 4e, 4m, 4n, 4o, 4p, 4q, 4r, 4s, 4t, 4u, 4v, and 4w to the January 17, 2019 Committee meeting for further discussion.

The Committee forwarded Item Nos. 4a, 4b, 4f, 4g, 4h, 4i, 4j, 4k, and 4l to the Board of Supervisors for consideration on date uncertain.

RESULT:HELD [UNANIMOUS]Next: 1/17/2019 2:00 PM
MOVER:Cindy Chavez, Vice Chairperson
SECONDER:S. Joseph Simitian, Chairperson
AYES:S. Joseph Simitian, Cindy Chavez

Transcript

Nov 29, 2018 10:00 AMFinance and Government Operations CommitteeRegular Meeting

 

10:29 AM29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and would like to vacate the chambers, this would be the time. If you're here for other items, we'll get to those in just a moment. All right. That takes us to item number 4 and item number 4 is surveillance use policies, and we have a number here today, a supervisor chavez, i'm going to ask that we continue some o these I haven't gotten to them, but there are some i'm ready try to take action today if you're amenable to that. Some cases I have some questions. Some cases concerns. And I see that we have folks from the district attorney's office here and they're here for items 4-a through i. And if we can ask whoever would like to come down to help present I would appreciate it. Both some questions and a couple of cases where a discussion might be helpful. And if you would all introduce yourselves at the panel. I see familiar faces but just introduce yourself for the record for anyone who May be following along. [speaker introduction]
10:31 AMThank you very much. let me begin with item 4a a b. The examination forensic tools and digital recorders. Supervisor chavez do you have any questions for those two?
I do for a better understanding. It says that you want to be ab to keep the data some permanent and some for 75 years. Is that a standard for keeping date if aadata now or is thil standard.
No, it's not a national standard. It would apply by state.
10:32 AMSo it's an internal policy.
Yes.
And another, you didn't speak on particular to make and model of a particular technology. I wonder if the reason for that is because you don't know itt or you have multiple makes and models, this was under a.
No, we know the make and models. We've elected to withhold some of those details if we belie it could compromise the use of that commitment. If the details, model and serial number were to be released.
Is that information forwarded to the board through county council? I understand that there might be some instances where there are some things we don't share with the public but we share with e board. Did that happen?
10:33 AMThat did not happen, no.
I that I that's reflective of my thinking on a number of items, the concern that I have. You can go through your questions, i'll see if there are others that pop up.
And while we're doing that, supervisor chavez, i'm going to turn to the county counsel, and ask if there is a way that the information can lawfully and appropriately shared with our board in a confidential basis we can assure ourselves that the information is being withhold for safety concern and for no other reason. I don't know if anybody has suggested there is another reason, but just that due diligence is helpful. I'll ask for you to pine on that as we get through the rest of the items. 4c, and that's the next one. This is--bear with me there are a lot of here. Hc, 4 d, and 4, e deal wi global positioning, night vision and surveillance technology that have prohibitive uses that talk about the fact--i'll talk about the gps tracker. It shall only be utilized pursuant to authorization. Welcome to our district attorney, Mr. Rosen. thank you. And in circumstances, that sounds pretty tight initially. But then it says in circumstances that--the supreme court looked at this very ise of whether or not putting a gps tracker on somebody's car was a violation of their reasonable expectation and privacy. The law enforcement folks who have been doing so thought it would not, and the united states court came to a different conclusion. So when we say or in circumstances under the law that do not impact anyone's reasonable expectation of privacy, i'm trying to sort through and wonder if that's a big, wide, open barn door that says that anything you do in public is protected, and the court has said with gps trackers, no if at some point if you're following someone's every public movement that raises a constitutional issue. It is different in the case where we have something like security cameras in a security facility, and then there are places likes bathroom, showers, etc. I think that's a little more manageable and understandable. But in this case what is our standard, and how can we feel confident that reasonable expectation of privacy is actually understood? Is there case law on this? I just don't know. Forgive me.
10:37 AMThere is case law that wod address it. This is a car and someone steals the car. That person would be hard press to argue that they had privacy in that stolen vehicle. It will be case specific if there is a w war warrant, oe can proceed.
Don't personalize this, but if we had an office that was n sensitive to people's reasonable expectation for privacy, and not sensitive to their constitutional rights, what to protect this policy from someone simply using the gps tracker ay time they want saying, well, you're out and about. We don't think that you have any reasonable expectation of privacy. Someone has a backpack on the floor. You slap a gps on the pocket, and off they go. The same thing with night visn and binoculars. Reasonable expectation of privacy. Someone lives out in the foothills. Leaves their windshields up and walks around in a towel after a shower and there is not house for five miles around. They probably have a reasonable expectation of privacy. If we have folks out with nig vision binoculars, rewe thinking that it's okay for someone to be staring through the window at that point? I'm not looking for specific cases, i'm trying to understand how we apply the policy on a case-by-case situation so you and your colleagues know it's an appropriate use or it isn't.
10:39 AMWell, the gps trackers, they can only be used in my office after they've been signed out. So there is a procedure where the officer, the investigator will be in consultation with the supervisor before checking out the tracker. One would hope in all of those situations, the investigator supervisor is involved in the investigation, and is approving of the anticipated use of that technology. The same with the binoculars. They have to be signed out. But ultimately relying on the professionalism of the officer and the appropriate training o those officers within our office so that they understand the payment of the policy and when they're in violation of the policy.
10:40 AMI'm not sure if they know when they're violating the policy if we don't have a cle idea of what this policy means. I don't think we're going to sort this out on these three items, I think we should continue the c, d, and e, the third party surveillance technology which also has the same language, and technology technology--it could be any manner of technology. The point of the policy is to give professionals clear guidance of what is appropriate and here's what is not. And expectation of privacy i'm sure we have as many different definitions for that as we have people in the room.
Reasonable expectation of privacy is not only a term tt lay people understand or have a sense of what that means, but it's a term that courts apply. Really to answer your question about whether this technology will be used lawfully or no the court will weigh in on that before using gps trackers without a search warrant or without consent or violation of someone's reasonable expectation of privacy. That's something that a court is going to tell us. No you should have got an warrant, and you should have gotten consent. I think that's ultimately how this will be sorted out, and in terms of the uses of any ofs technology, we're using this as part of our investigations, and certainly if anyone in our office is using night vision, and checking out night vision goggles and they're using them because they want to spy on their ex, that's something that they'll be disciplined for. It's hard to any the hypothetical question you're answering. When we use these for investigations, we're going to be mindful of what the law is.
10:42 AMI think what will. helpful if we can bring more clarity to these definitions. It May be as simplet as as determined by case law or such and such amendment of the constitution.
Supervisor vichies, before you move on these. It's not about questioning the professionalism or the adjustment people using the technology. It's about trying to make them feel confident that they've got clear guidance. You know. You can't follow the rules if you don't know what the rules are. If you want someone to do something, you have to make t easier for them to do it. And then you have to make it explicit, what lawsuit would suggest.
10:43 AMI would just add that in trying to come up with the specific rules for a myriad of situations, it's much easier said than actually done. While we do want to get cr guidance for our law enforcement officers, we need to have some familiarity that we can draft something within 50 words that can come in front of them. Part of what we rely on is t we receive from court about ce law and isn't wayses. We can there is language that can address the concerns that you have.
10:44 AMThank you. supervisor chavez.
This May sound like a tangential question. But why is night vision goggles under this technology?
I'm going to lead a little bit if I may. We had a--when the ordinance w originally adopted, one of the conversations we had was about whether or not it would be limited to some limited number of identifiable technology, these three things. Cell phone simulators, gps trackers, something else. Or whether we wanted to have an ordinance in place that covered all manner of surveillance technology, and that was what folks in this world called future poor meaning what happens next week. And ultimately the language in our ordinance, it does both. Here are specific things that we want to be clear we'll talk about. But anything that meets this set of definition, so criteria. Then it falls on people to discuss well, is this or is ts not surveillance technology within the meeting of the ordinance? And in some cases people were anxious about that and went t the county council office. I'm guess you you have given this some thought.
10:45 AMYes, I think that could be the direction that we received from the committee. And based on that, for the ultimate approval. We used the committee intentionally, we kept it intentionally prod. By providing technology and a list of five items doesn't account for the tremendous knowledge and technology change over in this valley and across the world. And certainly the da's office, and the sheriff's office, they're trying to stay abreast of the latest and greatest things. If you would hike. I'm happy to read the definiti but it's an incredibly broad definition.
10:46 AMI do know that. it surprises me a little bit because--what i'm trying to understand, is this something that the da recognized as a you thought should be covered or were you asked to cover it?
No, we did not include it a a tool that should be clued the definition of technology a county counsel. There was advice from county counsel a go through the the definition of technology. So with that reason I drafted the policy.
10:47 AMThank you.
Thank you.
So i'm going to ask that w condition items c, d, and e on that point. Other than that issue, supervisor, I didn't have a concern about c, d, and e and wanted to check with you before we go on to any other questio or concerns about c, d, and under item 4. That goes to item 5. Excuse me, f. Under four, 4 . As far as of the district attorney, video surveillance and recording of evidence oh storage facility. I didn't have any comments on that.
10:48 AMNeither did i.
And then g and h, I did he some questions if you'll bear with me as I look through.
So g is the access card and biometric system. On data retention I just want make sure that I understood wt the cross-reference was here. I'm looking at page 3 of 3 d biometric fingerprint system document. Packet page 73 for those using the packet. It says under data retention, see the county wide surveillae use policy for facility access control technology which addresses data retention. Will someone refresh my memory on what that is in preference to?
10:49 AMI can do that, supervisor. the facilities and sleep department drafted for consideration and board approval, county wide badge access, I believe the outset f this. The crime lab policy it says this policy has been offered to supplement, and the goal for t department and we try to assist with is to make sure if there are differences between crime lab specific use, retention, anything else, it was laid out in this policy, and it was the exact same as the county wide one that has already been submitted to the board and approved by the full board, if we would refer to the county wide one.
10:50 AMSo these are the standard type cards that all of us carry around, the badges that we use to access our buildings that use, I believe, if i'm remembering correctly, the i. D. Technology?
The answer to that is yes, but i'll defer to the crime l director who uses this on a daily bases and provides the detail.
Yes, we have the use of that we use in the county. We have pinch print readers as well. And we have evidence and things that have nature. To be used by the crime lab.
Thank you. okay, that's what I thought was the case, but I just wanted t verify that. Then the next item after acce card and pieio metric finger tp systems, is the multi media evidence unit software and hardware, and unit authorized use, page one of the policy under paragraph 2, packet page 78, for those using it. The tool shall only be used pursue want to a search warrant by owner consent or on aband property. The sole purpose shall be to identify the owner of the device so that law enforcement May get a search warrant or seek consent if either are legally required. Tool shall be use in analyzing, enhancing evidence relevant to the civil criminal activity under investigation, so on and so forth. All of these shall be prohibited. Are you talking about the ability to crack somebody's cell phone here?
10:52 AMYes.
And what we're indicating here, that's only to be done with the search warrant or consent if required, are there circumstances under which they are not required?
Well, that's yes with discuss abandoned property. It May or May not be required
Can you define abandoned property so I understand the context here.
10:53 AMWe find a cell phone at the crime scene. Whose phone is it? Nobody says it's their phone. We have know no idea whose t is, but because it's near a crime scene.
The soul purpose of of the examination shall be to identify the owner of the device. You're going to identify the owner and we're following the law and not look at anythingn the phone if they don't have warrant or consent at this point.
That's correct, and when we get search warrants that allow us to open phones and look r specific evidence, the search warrant lays out what in particular we can look for because people's cell phones have all kinds of information on it, and search warrants are constructed specifically to coy apply with the california electric communication privacy act and. Says what we can look at on te cell phone.
10:54 AMThere is a record of what I being looked at. Can a group of individuals engage in a conspiracy to violate the law? The answer is yes. That's why i'm employed at district attorney because people do that quite often. But what you're relying on here is the fact that there is a record of what people look at. Supervisor, that's when law enforcement gets a search warrant to go through someone's house to look for items or typ of items, and where they can search for those types of items would be found. If officers are searching in areas where that item would not be found, there is violation of that. There are mechanisms in place to require officer 0 follow what the search warrants are, which are court record ordered.
10:55 AMI unfortunately don't have a lot of experience with search warrants. But that's going to necessarily entail, looking at a bunch of other stuff. For me to understand that this is this, this is this, this I this, and oh, this is it. When you're looking through someone's phone when you're looking for or you have a warrant for someone's home, and you're looking for a document, you're looking at 20 other documents, you're just going find stuff that is unrelated.
10:56 AMYes, that's correct. that's what the law specifically allows for. But looking through a cell phone. In some circumstances it May be that other items are looked at on the cell phone to figure t whether that something with we're supposed to be looking for or not. But there are ways of searc cell phones and looking for specific information, where we're going to look for key wo terms. That would be limited to what we're looking for. There are different ways of doing that depending on what we're looking for.
10:57 AMI don't have anything else o g or h. Supervisor chavez?
North do i.
And then on i. I don't have any issues on tt one. Nor does supervisor chavez. On a through i, i'm going t supervisor chavez for a motion on to move approval on items b, f, g, h and I and i'll that again for the record. Ab, fgh and i, and to cone items c, d, and e for some additional work on the language about reasonable expectation, privacy, and Mr. Rosen, I take your point that we can't identify every one. There are 101 different possibilityies, supervisor chavez. Before I second. Before we call it done I want to turn to Mr. Williams and say, is there a way we can have the me and model numbers in a way tt wouldn't compromise public safety without sharing information that shouldn't be shared, so we know what our county board elected has an.
10:59 AMWe'll see what mechanism we can use. I got a motion by supervisor chavez to ford ab, deh and id forward a,c, d, and e. I want to thank you for your patience in walking us through this. That takes us to the next batch in item 4, for the office of t sheriff and we have the custody bureau. And we have j, k, l, and m those are booking, photographs cameras, hand-held cameras, monitoring and audio recorders, and I see that we've been joined, if you'll introduce yourself for the record.
11:00 AMHappy to do so. [speaker introduction] i'm okay on j, k, and l ani have a discussion I would like to prompt on portable digital recorders, but before I get there did you have questions?
I did have just one. I know as part of the telephe monitoring,.
Well, can you repeat the question.
Do we record inmate conversations with the jail observer?
11:01 AMThe jail observer having conversation with inmates over the phone, yes. The only conversations not recorded would be attorney-client privileged conversation.
And you listen to the observer--have we always done that?
All phone calls. except for the phone calls by attorneys. If there is any other type o phone call made. It will be recorded.
I didn't realize that. the reason why I was asking th question is that I think I was under the impression that was not the case.
11:02 AMI'm being informed that the phone calls are also designated recorded, the attorney-client.
That was actually my question. I didn't see that denoted, and I didn't understand that. Just to follow up, the bodiesf work, I don't know if that's a jail policy or the county policy, and some might already be in the law who needs attory county privilege, is that a policy or a decision that the sheriff department has made?
11:03 AMTo respect the privacy of t observer.
Supervisor chavez, thank you for catching this one. My question would be if we look at packet page 107, and gentlemen, if you're not working from the packet, it's page 2 of 5 in the document on inmate telephone looking at participate e c. That's the place where the exception, potentially what you said above is that every call gets monitored. And then in paragraph c are the exceptions for the public defenders office or verify pre-registered, the calls shall not be listened to or record. Do we need to ask you to, supervisor chavez, to your point, is that a place that is clear in the technology.
11:04 AMI think that would be helpful. I was even thinking that making a reference to the other po would be helpful because there is a policy at work. You're just affirming a policy that you have already.
We can add the program in is list.
Thank you.
11:05 AMAnd thank you for the catch, supervisor.
Portable digital audio recorders authorized and prohibited uses. These are just what they say they are. They're recording devices. And under authorized and prohibited uses, it indicates that the recorders shall only be used by sheriff office personnel to record verbal statements. I'm under section two. Shall only be used by personal nell to record verbal statements of victims, witnesses, suspects and others in criminal investigations and administrative investigations and to record aud audio incident events being monitored, and th talks about what is not permitted. Whether these are straight ahead high. Thank you for coming in. We're going to record with yr knowledge. So can you help us out on this. If you want to huddle, that's fine. I'm trying to understand if this policy permit surreptitious recordings using these devices. I don't mean to put an ich n it. I mean not being.
11:06 AMGenerally there will be a none certificate rip tissues recording. There May be times during the investigation that surreptitious recordings are country and allowable. We specifically do not have the surreptitious barrings, language language.
11:07 AMI think what I would like to suggest on this one, supervisor chavez, that for j, k, and l the hand-held digital cameras and inmate monitoring, i'm ready to forward those to our full board with a favorable recommendation and with the direction that staff and sheriff department will work to add the language that you've been kind up to brief on the observer program. But that we continue item m which is the digital audio recorders steps, and follow up on the conversation and better understanding of what it is for me to what extent the tool can be used without knowledge or consent of someone. Is that an acceptable? A motion for that evacuate before I call in the second ad without objection any additional comments or questions? No? Without objections. So order: we'll follow up on item number m, and we'll forwa those to the board. And I think of you as the kr of the sequencing of these. Do we know when those will go the board? Will we get them there?
11:08 AMWe'll have to check the current schedule. These have been on the November November 3rd meeting. So we've been thrown off. The earliest we'll get to is second meeting of december. And that's when we come to the board the first meeting of january. I believe it's one of those two.
11:09 AMThank you. and then that takes us to the next batch, which is the health and hospital system, and my apologies, we just ran out of time to give the scrutiny gn the numbers we had stacked up, and that's on me. But I did have a couple of questions about 'n' and 'o. ' and then I was fine with . Do we have anyone from the hospital system who can help us with this? Don't be shy. And again, if you'll introduce yourself for the committee. . [speaspeaker introduction] on n, the baby match, I spa couple of minutes online-there wasn't a lot of information on the website, candidly. I'm on packet page 125, what is the actual technology? Is this a rdf technology, a radio device? Essentially we wrap a band around the leg of the baby, a a similar device on the mother and we make sure that the baby is not going off in the direction that he or she shouldn't, but it's not really clear to me other than the fas that there is a baby match. How does this work? I get a better sense of what we're capturing, and what we're doing with it.
11:11 AMThank you. that is correct. It usually goes on the leg. I believe it is rfid technolog but I would have to check. It triggers alarms when the babies move outside of a certain perimeter.
I'm going to ask that we continue this and get more of a sense of what is the actual technology being used because without knowing that, I feel a little ill equipped to then understand. What information is being captured and then what is being stored and how long.
11:12 AMThe only information being captured is the baby's last name and that is expunged on the discharge. The device itself is linked to that last name and it's really--the point is a trigger of the alarms.
Of course, the other information being captured is the location.
I'm not sure that it captures the location. Number one, we would like to know. And number two, we would like some of that information folded in the policy. That's my personal request of the member of the board. Before we leave that, supervisor chchavez, anything on that one? That takes us to o, the badge and biometric reeders. And this one. You had my questions answered a previous item. We're talking about badge reeders. I'm talking about packet, are these the standard from the county staff?
11:13 AMIt says under purpose in second paragraph. Identify the individual on the badge and then it says badge readers collect information such as the date and time and individual enters and exits the building. This information May be provided to local law enforcement authorities come comma. And the health and hospital system, director of the fasts, so on and so forth. And then later on under data access, it says the biometric reader shall be restricted only to personnel protective service, director of disabilities, department heads and other county personnel for county purposes only. And then down under third party data sharing, you can see the information that is sort of embedded throughout the document. Under 8 it says it shall be permitted for the following, law enforcement representatives outside if the san can clara over head for written designee believes that the data shows the behave or activity as it appears improper or in furtherance of activity. So my question is, the city of pop quiz, not a trick questi. Great. And one of the other 14 ci enforcement, someone who has their own police department shows up, and the campbell police department says we're looking for sally schmidt, what can you tell us? How does that get processed?
11:15 AMSupervisor, I don't know the answer to the question. It's an operational question. It's in the drafting of the policy. I'm going to ask that we k this one through a little bit more because there is a tension here that is built in between the desire and the appropriate need to cooperate with bona fide law enforcement inquiryies, b even someone in the hospital I a piece of hippa piece of information. I think there are some challenges there. We would like to work throws through a little more fully and a little more clearly. I meant to mention this, when the district attorney rosen w here we've got these tools th are bona fide tools that in 99% of the cases are used appropriately. I'm thinking of our criminal databases. And we know that folks from the district attorney's office and the sheriff's offices on occasion has accessed that information to the credit of both organizations they've been disciplined when that happened. So tso-so the question is here is how do we make sure that available for appropriate purposes when needed. But also to make sure that someone who is stalking their ex-wife or estranged partner doesn't show up, and manages talk their way in getting identification information, they May an victim of domestic violence, and I know these are hard, real world day-to-day challenges that you all face, but I want to identify that.
11:18 AMOne thing that might be helpful is when you bring that back, just to walk through some scenarios. One of the things that I know that for any of us who have either been in a hospital late at night or an emergency room o been part of any in any of te venues, that the connection between law enforcement and our healthcare is actually pretty profound. And i'm not sure that we wrestled with it. I mean when we drop somebody of at the hospital for either mental health issues or someone is being brought from an accident where. Drugs or alcohol are considered. I think having some clear guidelines about how we function and frankly what people's expectations should be about privacy and those environments. That would be helpful. Thank you for bringing that up the way you did. I wouldn't have thought about that.
11:19 AMThank you.
That takes us to p, the f warning record privacy monitoring system. I have no comments, questions concerns about that. Supervisor chavez? And unfortunately that's as far as I got on my home work. So the question I would ask, I think we do need to have follow-up question on n and o n p, even though it there does appear to be any issues, I suggest we leave it on the to list so we're not piecemealing this exercise. We come back to you on the others. And i'll work with my office to do is to finish my office, and reach out to folks at health a hospital. And so we can get as many of these issues resolved before it comes back to committee. And we won't have to do it in realtime that way. That May be the most expeditious expeditious. Supervisor chavez is free to reach out for additional comments or questions.