Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks staff for side‑by‑side surveillance ordinance comparison, to resolve definitions and oversight roles
Summary
Council members asked staff to prepare a side‑by‑side comparison of the current surveillance ordinance language and proposed modifications, and to clarify whether the ordinance will apply citywide or only to police uses; staff also noted the need to assign a city code number and format the ordinance for final vote.
Council members asked staff to prepare a side‑by‑side comparison of the current surveillance ordinance and proposed modifications so the council can consider specific edits and vote on whether to adopt each change.
The mayor opened new business by asking for an update on the surveillance ordinance. Staff told the council the next decisions will include any definitional language, whether the ordinance covers police activity or citywide surveillance, and how a Civilian Police Review Board (CPRB) or the Human Rights Commission (HRC) would participate in oversight.
Mariel asked the council to take the ordinance “as it now stands” and to vote item‑by‑item on whether to incorporate suggested modifications or keep the original language. She said, “what I'd like to see is for us to just go vote it up and down in terms of whether or not we want to incorporate the modifications or if we want to keep the original.”
Staff agreed to provide a side‑by‑side comparison and noted that a prior straw poll would need to be followed by an official council vote to determine whether coverage is police‑only or citywide. A staff member also explained that when the council is ready to adopt the ordinance as a package it should be formatted as a city code revision and assigned a code section number; staff said that formatting would not change the substantive content.
Council members requested time to review the compiled suggestions and asked staff to present the side‑by‑side at the next meeting for discussion, with the goal of a fuller package the following week. Staff noted some scheduling constraints but said they would aim to have the comparison ready for the next council discussion and a potential final decision in the subsequent meeting.
Next steps: staff will prepare and circulate a side‑by‑side comparison of the ordinance language and proposed edits, clarify the proposed oversight role for the CPRB and HRC, and format the ordinance as a code revision if council desires. The council has not taken a formal vote on the ordinance in this session.
