[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6150665,"mediaKeyId","5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1","parentId",5507353,"title","Montgomery County pauses limited rollout of security robot 'Parker' after council questions on privacy, outreach","audioSeconds",4416,"startMs",561000,"endMs",4977000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1&start=561&end=4977","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1/thumbnail_561000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6150665/Montgomery-County/Maryland/Montgomery-County-pauses-limited-rollout-of-security-robot-Parker-after-council-questions-on-privacy-outreach","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150665-bb8e776e26317d66b715b5e39a69ef9c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770507698&Signature=WufQ7f231TvCQL52~WWnJvvfhiY37tNI1L1Y~kuDvE1Pdt69-qBXzbrbYSxTWPcNO-~l24365Zk7KeR~rP484SXmkE9M66PQHvJjy~vze4lofrCbvQ1csK24hWUPXUKgu9dcz~HtPy4~exYkje-wOAJUHe0vl2CiPdGaGuBEsTq1Rk07X-~08kQE~vM4Cxkmo5DByfBqfd7TCT~KwUjm6cWPlXt~N2-PMD-Tgfl90AvO2x~nNRhlZjlrM5YUEi9HAcVnZQmpRofajDTaxTmbTapjpVEEwLnrCkoNTu~PxpuzQhYXQmlM6hHspj--Z2HCQeJRGU1P-cdCadOXs-MXqA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Montgomery County, MD","date","2025-07-30T07:44:01Z","article","Montgomery County’s Department of Transportation briefed the full County Council on plans for a one‑year pilot of an autonomous security robot in Garage 61 in Downtown Silver Spring, and Council members pressed DOT on public outreach, data access and privacy protections.

DOT Director Conklin told the council the device is a leased, vendor‑maintained security robot that will “patrol the garage, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week on a regular cycle with a charging interval.” He said the vendor chosen through an open procurement stores video and license‑plate data for 30 days and that “we retain 100% ownership of this data.” Conklin also said, “It was not intended that the program would be announced through an early morning news story,” and apologized for the early media attention.

The device, described by DOT staff as roughly 5 feet tall and about 420 pounds, uses lidar for navigation, records 360‑degree video (DOT said it is not recording audio), and can log the presence of people, groups or vehicles and broadcast pre‑recorded messages. Joe Stomana of MCDOT said the county’s parking camera count has increased from about 280 cameras to roughly 488 systemwide since 2023 and that Garage 61 now has 36 cameras (up from 20).

Why it matters: Council members framed the discussion around public safety, trust and civil‑liberties concerns in a diverse downtown. Council members emphasized that outreach and multi‑language engagement are essential before a pilot goes into service, especially given the county’s large immigrant population. Council member Mink asked whether the device could create more fear than safety; Conklin said public perception will be measured during the pilot, and the county will “monitor information about whether the public likes this robot or feels threatened and intimidated.”

Key points from the briefing
- Location and purpose: DOT selected Garage 61 — an outdoor, high‑use facility that serves Veterans Plaza and large event venues — in part because communications work better above grade. DOT said Garage 61 accounts for roughly 20% of incidents in the Downtown Silver Spring Parking Lot District. The primary incident types are property damage, theft and nuisance complaints; DOT said person‑to‑person violence is rare in the garages.
- Capabilities and limits: DOT said the robot will capture 360‑degree video, has a license‑plate reader, and “can sense the presence of people or groups of people, but it cannot identify who those people are.” DOT said the robot will not use facial recognition, will not connect to external flagged databases in the pilot, and “is not recording audio.”
- Data, ownership and access: Conklin said DOT owns the data; Knightscope (the vendor named in the briefing) can review logs for performance and operational needs but “does not have the ability to use this data for any private purpose.” DOT said footage can be shared with police on request and retained beyond 30 days if an incident requires longer storage or legal preservation (MPIA requests would follow county attorney review).
- Vendor and security claims: DOT staff said the vendor is a U.S. public company with FedRAMP‑level certifications for data security and that the county negotiated roughly $90,060 for the one‑year lease, reduced from a higher price. DOT said the vendor is responsible for repair/replacement under the lease and that the contract contains a 72‑hour service‑level guarantee for replacement.

Council questions and concerns
Council members asked how often footage is reviewed (DOT said a DOT security manager reviews material as needed and the vendor provides twice‑daily summary reports), who has access (DOT staff and contracted vendor monitoring, with law enforcement access by request), whether company ties to other firms or federal programs raise future privacy risks (DOT said contract provisions and data ownership protections were reviewed but acknowledged the concerns), and what measures the county will use to judge success (reduced incidents, useful investigative footage and public perception).

Council members pressed DOT to expand outreach beyond August, hold meetings in languages spoken in the area (council members requested Spanish and Amharic specifically), coordinate with local service organizations, and publish clear protocols about when footage is shared with police. Several council members said the initial rollout should have included council briefing and public engagement before media announcement; DOT confirmed it will run a community engagement program before deployment and summarize input by late September.

Next steps and constraints
DOT said it plans meet‑the‑robot events, listening sessions at multiple times (day/evening) in August and September, a public town hall, and an outreach table with local groups; DOT said it would summarize input near the end of September and finalize operational protocols before launching the pilot in late September or early October. The one‑year contract term runs from the vendor’s start date; DOT said a pause requested by council members has allowed time to extend outreach and refine protocols.

Discussion vs. decision: The council requested a pause in deployment and extensive public engagement and asked DOT to document—before launch—operational protocols and the chain of custody for footage. No formal county vote was taken on the pilot during the briefing; DOT described an internal pause and a public engagement schedule pending council input.

Closing: DOT told the council it will return with a summary of public input and the operational rules it adopts; council members requested written protocols for data sharing, a clear request/response record for law‑enforcement requests, and multi‑language outreach.

Sources: Briefing remarks by DOT Director Conklin; presentation and answers by MCDOT security staff (Joe Stomana); questions and comments from Council members Katz, Fanny Gonzalez, Mink, Friedson, Glass and others during the council work session.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","July 29, 2025 - Council Session (pm)","oneSentenceSummary","Montgomery County’s Department of Transportation briefed the full County Council on plans for a one‑year pilot of an autonomous security robot in Garage 61 in Downtown Silver Spring, and Council members pressed DOT on public outreach, data access and privacy protections.","taxTitle","Montgomery County, Maryland","taxId",3351,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150646,"Council approves FY25–30 CIP amendment and supplemental appropriation for 'Montgomery Connects' project",76,57000,133000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1&start=57&end=133","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1/thumbnail_57000.jpg","/articles/6150646/Montgomery-County/Maryland/Council-approves-FY2530-CIP-amendment-and-supplemental-appropriation-for-Montgomery-Connects-project","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150646-11ebed1a693d0bbf3c3cbdcbf093ec36/orig.mp4?Expires=1770507698&Signature=i54h7AArUE0najBqsn3nZoum8VQ3Wlv9xt6A-Qrf~zttMkiB5ftF1hiq852vZpWCG30gRdd92vxV67CC5cNGZl4QpW28tsqllJtCxYee7GTTst21jmgMB~OvmJC0jpbgwiPuPjykWeGLWSLO2dDEHo7O6-2e65b7Pkhp27y~ypkK40YiyeuaQ70k3HfjBGkcP2O4s6Gqowp7VHOOOf9w~UFPWs3eSw0ml-SFoOPz3JSxrI1nAkF87fZVABAmSJgjahZUJcP7qP55iXltxiNd~EEGmu0Q0m3gfo9uAuQR5z6GTy4Zws117hqJTVTkSd3A4YwwoSfOkyJvyc-R5szXUA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Montgomery County Council closed a public hearing and unanimously approved an amendment to the FY25–30 Capital Improvements Program and supplemental appropriation 25‑88 to the FY26 capital budget for the Department of Technology and Enterprise Business Solutions, Montgomery Connects project (P341700). Council staff said federal aid for the appropriation is about $6,100,000 and local contributions total roughly $43,000; there were no registered public speakers for the hearing and the council took immediate action after the hearing.

Procedure: Council member Sales moved approval and Council Vice President Juwon Do seconded; the clerk recorded all council members present and online voting in favor during a show‑of‑hands.

What happens next: The appropriation will be incorporated into the FY26 capital budget for the Montgomery Connects project, and county staff will proceed with the project as authorized by the supplemental appropriation.

Source: Council staff presentation and roll‑call/show‑of‑hands actions at the start of the meeting.","The council closed a public hearing and unanimously approved an amendment to the FY25–30 capital improvements program and supplemental appropriation (25‑88) to the FY26 capital budget for Montgomery Connects (Project P341700) totaling about $6.1 million in federal aid plus local contributions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150651,"Council unanimously approves correction to retirement groups and exempts Internet access from procurement law with administrative procedures",159,285000,444000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1&start=285&end=444","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1/thumbnail_285000.jpg","/articles/6150651/Montgomery-County/Maryland/Council-unanimously-approves-correction-to-retirement-groups-and-exempts-Internet-access-from-procurement-law-with-administrative-procedures","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150651-fe4d1a7be5dc138bc3d5833082050f33/orig.mp4?Expires=1770507698&Signature=YJhIhnJm7VrmII36MO3icjpZ5fotbG7rtoTTQb0ptIAkeVTcP~hWHsuZNXLtnziGzTpd8ib5bDp09WDh3E9xMi92VaprX4VNAZahOoi6CLan7fdrxoJYHlIq3QUy5EGSOQ9-OqtarduLWh68KtSZl-NFSEWmhGP1~EHr4UWyUR-aBQR2inHuZMusy~WPeC6YR0gtLG0dYPK0131nUhJyOGNLdSCw-8yM4ZR2TFsqFACB983801GaivyQAZWaMm9YZjDDvPbL~3UNBRG1kAWFpMief~-YnFFCVCAUFpxN62KALOxEBksGBdqXKwDvo5eJ3ILfkyyilK4tocsdUfBpqg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Montgomery County Council took final votes on two bills recommended unanimously by the Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee.

Emergency communications retirement correction
The council approved an expedited bill that corrects a drafting oversight from 2023 by adding ECC managers 3 to Group E eligibility in the employees’ retirement system, retroactive to the effective date of expedited Bill 20‑23 (Aug. 7, 2023). The committee and council said the measure fixes an omission for certain emergency communications personnel; the council recorded roll‑call votes in favor.

Internet access procurement exemption
The council also enacted Bill 17‑25 to exempt acquisition of Internet access service from the county procurement law, adopting a committee amendment that requires procurement procedures to be established through administrative procedure consistent with county code §2A‑16 rather than by the chief administrative officer alone. The committee recommended expedited enactment, citing time and dollar thresholds for the existing waiver; the council approved the bill by roll call.

Procedure and next steps: Both measures were moved by the Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee and carried in roll‑call votes; committee staff and the clerk recorded individual council member yes votes during the session. The Internet access exemption requires the county to adopt administrative procedures for procurements in this category.","The council approved an expedited correction to add Emergency Communications Center (ECC) managers 3 to retirement Group E retroactive to Aug. 7, 2023, and enacted Bill 17‑25 to exempt Internet access service acquisitions from competitive procurement while requiring administrative procedures consistent with county code.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150655,"Council introduces bill to prohibit stopping or parking in dedicated bikeways",66,148000,214000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1&start=148&end=214","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1/thumbnail_148000.jpg","/articles/6150655/Montgomery-County/Maryland/Council-introduces-bill-to-prohibit-stopping-or-parking-in-dedicated-bikeways","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150655-ed1da0f036684d3a2d7096df77c6a913/orig.mp4?Expires=1770507698&Signature=D6GlQ99jUG6fNwspOsv7BxZh4TY0kZ4r213AdVugZLtgPUtQ1Jwo5XYVKzzPvijTe2Cn5eZKhjSWGMsHXqvAKj1wCZrblgG4CaSyUkMqN7uHxGxebteo5b6xxGZXA0dO3tG-cpv5AYxx1LIDRz6DcUWN44W3C3tc-X42TkqsLK5eMD~-K0pkHbnTgrtgEW39jKCuFDHlWLf8CnXWB4A686nINO~IJlFMO1Mh5rCptAys2NKRrrHzIfRBijmIqfOo5F1XfC8zSPvixt9dd1AFYtPHpNowkLPlZs7kJwkwz88n~EJUklfxOqPwuccwJw606mpzOa2GCL~Vq6i61ylIhA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Montgomery County Council introduced Bill 28‑25, which would prohibit the standing, stopping or parking of vehicles in dedicated bikeways. Council member Glass, the lead sponsor, told the council there were “59 cyclist involved crashes and 1 fatality” in the first six months of the year in Montgomery County and said the bill is intended to enhance safety and align county rules with other jurisdictions that already prohibit parking in bike lanes.

Why it matters: Sponsors framed the bill as an enforcement complement to the county’s bike‑lane investments and Vision Zero goals. The bill’s lead sponsor said the measure builds on the Safe Streets Act and thanked local organizations including the Washington Area Bicyclists Association and the Action Committee for Transit for their support.

Procedure: The bill was introduced and a public hearing was scheduled for Sept. 30 at 1:30 p.m.; no vote was taken at introduction. Cosponsors listed were Lukey, Friedson and Fanny Gonzalez.

Sources: Remarks by Council member Glass during bill introduction.","Bill 28‑25 was introduced to prohibit standing, stopping or parking in dedicated bikeways; sponsors say the measure aims to improve bicycle safety and aligns county policy with other jurisdictions. A public hearing was set for Sept. 30.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150660,"Council approves overhaul of incentive‑density public benefit system, sets delayed effective date",0,4944000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1&start=4944&end=4944","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5507353-741bd6253fdfa769f6e5bdaa89f9ebc1/thumbnail_4944000.jpg","/articles/6150660/Montgomery-County/Maryland/Council-approves-overhaul-of-incentivedensity-public-benefit-system-sets-delayed-effective-date","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150660-3c19c1eaf4522bbff43f67548dca5c8a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770507699&Signature=Qujab~CsyfJYukefXI4lrxBhQsexEhue-s2l-YtC72vHEKe-EkaMi0qMaIkQhKWv~H4PKbZcRscHXODDuRlF3e8QNWlfJgcJVDpwqSv8FP65GUurz-SV83RHfcEJs~-9ZMx4pGlNxh18ucPU1PW9F1ehKHDWGtPHF~~S8Bemx2dVzWpi~zrpUynATVtW6bbji0Wv0dbwjCofR3MSkJzbcXNbh8YnoxM-QP3xJeK0qWedqJiC5xLKzYG66aoO9B6KKvw2S7HaeE8F7UfAZggeeYB0G6yfPc-FDpK-CbbQ24ZPVCRUvmTJP6cOFXkHkSlJwQXmb0E5BGlSemJmaDklcA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Montgomery County Council voted to approve Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 25‑05, which revises the county’s incentive‑density (optional‑method) public benefit menu for commercial, residential and employment zones, and set an effective date of Jan. 1, 2026 so implementation guidelines can be prepared.

Chair Friedson, presenting the Planning, Housing and Parks Committee recommendations, said the ZTA “updates the public benefit system” to align bonus density with current county priorities and to streamline and modernize benefit categories that were first established in 2010. Friedson said the committee sought to balance local community needs and countywide priorities and thanked planning staff and consultants for the work.

Why it matters: ZTA 25‑05 changes how developers can earn additional density through a tiered public‑benefit menu, clarifies grandfathering rules for large, phased projects, adds off‑site transportation improvements to higher tiers, and requires implementation guidelines from the Planning Board. The council amended the ZTA so those guidelines are in place before the code changes take effect.

Provision highlights and committee action
- Master plans and overlays: The ZTA allows master plans to modify the public‑benefits menu consistent with the ZTA’s intent. The committee recommended language clarifying that overlay/master plans may adjust the menu.
- Site‑plan thresholds: The committee replaced an initial 0.5 FAR trigger for site‑plan review in the EOF zone with the thresholds from county code section 7‑3‑4(a) to better align review triggers with standard practice.
- Off‑site transportation benefits: The committee added major off‑site items such as fully protected intersections, new traffic signals and bikeway segments to higher‑value benefit tiers; planning staff will provide implementation guidance defining what qualifies.
- Grandfathering: The committee added language to grandfather projects that have existing approvals (sketch plan, preliminary plan, site plan, building permit, conditional use, record plat or local map amendment) so multi‑phase projects are not forced to restart benefit negotiations mid‑construction.

Office‑to‑residential pilot and MPDU interaction
The council debated how recently enacted expedited Bill 2‑25, a pilot program to encourage conversions of office to residential, should interact with the ZTA. Planning staff and consultant Hyatt Brown presented a feasibility analysis showing conversions are generally feasible only in demolition‑and‑rebuild scenarios; adaptive reuse conversions remain costly. Two policy options were discussed: (1) make no change (pilot units that exceed county minimum MPDU requirements would make a project eligible for incentive density under current ZTA language), or (2) require pilot projects to provide additional public benefits above the pilot MPDU requirement to obtain incentive density. A motion to adopt option 2 failed; the council left the ZTA language unchanged so pilot projects will be treated under current ZTA provisions.

Effective date and implementation
Council staff moved and the council agreed to change the ZTA effective date to Jan. 1, 2026 so the Planning Board can issue implementation guidelines before the code is effective. The council approved ZTA 25‑05 as amended in a roll‑call vote; the clerk recorded votes in favor from a majority of members present and online.

What happens next: Planning staff will draft implementation guidelines for the Planning Board and the public, and DOT/planning will coordinate to define qualifying off‑site transportation improvements. The council asked staff to produce clear guidance on how the pilot office‑to‑residential projects will be evaluated in practice.

Sources: Chair Friedson and planning staff presentation (ZTA 25‑05 committee packet); consultant analysis by Hyatt Brown; council roll call recorded during final action.","The County Council adopted Zoning Text Amendment 25‑05 to modernize the optional‑method public benefit menu used to gain additional density. The Planning, Housing and Parks committee recommended changes and the council approved an amendment setting an effective date of Jan. 1, 2026 to allow implementation guidelines to be developed.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Montgomery County pauses limited rollout of security robot 'Parker' after council questions on privacy, outreach

Council approves FY25–30 CIP amendment and supplemental appropriation for 'Montgomery Connects' project

Council unanimously approves correction to retirement groups and exempts Internet access from procurement law with administrative procedures

Council introduces bill to prohibit stopping or parking in dedicated bikeways

Council approves overhaul of incentive‑density public benefit system, sets delayed effective date