Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Policy Juvenile Probation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rules Committee advances juvenile probation web-filtering surveillance policy
Summary
The committee recommended forwarding an ordinance that approves web-filtering software for the juvenile probation department, which presenters said blocks harmful content, restricts features like live chat, retains website-access data for about one year by default, and records no PII or protected health information.
The Rules Committee voted to forward an ordinance approving a surveillance-technology policy governing the juvenile probation department’s use of web-filtering software.
Elisa Vayesa, chapter 19b policy coordinator for the juvenile probation department, told the committee the department procured a web filter to limit distractions and protect youths from online threats such as malware and spyware while preserving access to educational resources. "The web filter not only blocks distractions, but it also protects against online threats like malware, spyware, and other hack and potential hacking attempts," Vayesa said.
Vayesa said the implementation team configured filters to restrict certain websites and features (for example, allowing YouTube but restricting live-chat streaming capabilities) and that IT staff monitor destination websites daily to prevent unintended uses. She also stated the system will not store personally identifiable information or protected health information and that only authorized staff can access website-visit data during online instruction.
When asked about cost, Vayesa said the department incurred an initial upfront cost "a bit under $5,000" and that subsequent expenses are user-license fees; another committee exchange referenced "2 to 3,000" during the cost discussion. On data retention, Vayesa said vendor default retention is one year but the city may request shorter retention or purge data as dictated by state juvenile policy or case circumstances.
No public speakers addressed the item. The committee voted unanimously to forward the ordinance to the full Board for consideration.
