►
Description
Docket #0684 - Ordinance on surveillance oversight and information sharing
A
The
committee
discussed
the
reason
for
incorporating
the
information
sharing
provisions
in
surveillance
oversight
in
a
single
ordinance
and
the
social
emotional
trauma
that
surveillance
may
cause
student
and
adult
residents.
The
committee
also
heard
public
testimony
student
parents,
teachers,
lawyers
and
advocates
shared
experiences
that
have
impressed
on
them
the
need
for
tighter
restrictions
on
bps
information.
A
A
I
will
now.
I
will
shortly
turn
it
over
to
the
lead
sponsors
of
this
matter,
but
I
wanted
to
just
make
sure
everyone
understood
the
goal
today.
It's
a
working
session.
I
assume
everyone
has
a
draft
of
the
document
in
front
of
them.
The
administration,
I
assume
I
will
announce
shortly,
who
is
expected
to
be
here
from
the
administration.
A
This
is
again
a
working
session,
so
the
the
issue
of
the
yes
or
no
of
this
ordinance
and
whether
it
should
or
shouldn't
happen,
could
have
been
discussed
in
the
in
the
hearing.
But
if
you're
not
here
really
to
work
on
the
language,
then
I
appreciate
that
you're
here,
but
we're
going
to
work
on
this
language.
A
In
terms
of
so
again,
everyone
should
have
a
draft
of
this
in
front
of
them,
and
I
look
forward
to
hearing
about
any
concerns
from
the
administration,
and
I
will
turn
it
over
now
to
the
lead
sponsors
to
be
followed
by
the
other
counselors
who
who
have
come
in
the
lead.
Sponsors
are
again
counselor
wu.
A
B
Good
morning
and
thank
you
so
much
everyone,
I'm
you
know
this
a
long
time.
Many
many
months
of
work
have
gone
into
this
from
our
advocates
and
our
community
partners
so
really
grateful
for
now
really
diving
into
the
details
and
eager
to
see
next
up.
So
thank
you
so
much
to
my
co-sponsors
and
everyone
in
this
coalition
and
the
administration
for
your
time.
D
Thank
you
so
much,
madam
chair.
I
just
want
to
thank
all
of
the
advocates
who
have
played
a
role
in
getting
us
this
far
and
will
be
playing
a
role
in
putting
together
the
language
here:
aclu
massachusetts,
the
student
immigration
movement,
the
pair
project,
the
btu
unafraid
educators
and
the
greater
boston
legal
services.
E
Thank
you,
counselor
janie.
Thank
you
so
much.
Madam
chair.
I
want
to
certainly
thank
my
colleagues
for
their
partnership
and
their
leadership
on
this
issue
certainly
want
to
thank
the
amazing
organizations
that
have
put
so
much
time
and
work
into
this.
I
want
to
give
a
shout
out
to
the
aclu,
I'm
unafraid
educators
and
the
student
immigra
immigration
movement
and
certainly
to
the
administration
that
is
here.
E
I
think
this
is
the
first
time
where
we're
really
all
together
here,
so
I'm
looking
forward
to
for
us
to
kind
of
dig
in
and
and
get
something
that
we
all
like,
so
that
we
pass
this
this
legislative
cycle,
which
we
know
ends
on
a
week
from
this
wednesday.
So
thank
you
again,
madam
chair,
looking
forward
to
getting
into
it.
G
H
I
A
J
A
A
Okay,
all
right,
so
I
forgot
to
announce
who
is
also
here
from
the
advocate
community,
who
has
done
an
excellent
job
in
making
sure
that
we
were
not
only
held
accountable
but
had
the
resources
that
we
need
to
to
come
into
this
working
session.
I
want
to
just
pull
them
up
real,
quick
and
announce
who
they
are.
A
C
K
A
A
A
Is
your
camera
on
yes,
hi,
I'm
so
sorry,
elena,
no
problem
at
all,
okay,
kate!
I
was
so
close.
So
close,
that's
what
you
get
for
bragging!
That's
what
you
get
for
bragging!
That's
what
that's
what
happens!
In
any
event,
I
would
like
to
turn
it
over
to
the
administration.
I
announced
several
of
the
folks
who
are
here
joining
us
today.
A
M
M
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
all
the
members
of
the
council,
the
sponsors
and
everyone
who's
worked
on
this
for
hosting
the
working
session.
Elevating
this
important
issue.
As
I
said,
my
name
is
john
toll,
the
honor
of
serving
as
a
policy
advisor
to
mayor
walsh.
We
appreciate
and
in
fact
embrace
the
spirit
of
the
ordinance
boston
has
a
long-standing
and
well-earned
reputation
for
innovation
and
utilizing
technology
and
data
to
serve
the
public.
Good
mayo
walsh
wants
to
remain
a
national
leader
in
this
regard.
M
In
our
view,
the
ordinance
has
to
be
viewed
on
three
separate
but
obviously
interrelated
levels,
the
legal,
the
technological
and
finally,
the
operational
or
the
practical
without
question.
A
meaningful
discussion
of
any
of
these
aspects
of
the
bill
could
probably
occupy
a
lot
more
than
limited
time.
We
have
here
today,
regardless
I'm
going
to
try
to
at
least
quickly
summarize
some
of
the
concerns
that
we
have
in
pretty
broad
terms
and
for
the
purpose
of
today's
working
session.
Members
of
the
administration's
I'll
introduce
shortly
they'll
focus.
M
M
That
said,
I
believe
the
administration
communicated
their
concerns
to
the
council
that,
as
currently
written
it's
in
violation
of
the
charter
and
likely
conflicts
with
a
number
of
state
laws.
I
don't
believe
that
opinion
has
changed
and
that
that's
an
obstacle
that
needs
to
be
discussed
and
work
through
and
again.
K
M
At
a
bit
of
a
deficit
to
do
that,
I'm
not
an
attorney.
The
next
level
of
concern
we
have
is
technological.
You
know.
First,
the
ordinance
is
really
broadly
written
and
in
our
view
it
appears
that
virtually
every
piece
of
hardware
software
data
set
anywhere
within
city
government
would
appear
to
fall
within
the
ambit
of
this
ordinance,
and
this
makes
compliance
with
all
subsequent
requirements
and
provisions
extraordinarily
difficult,
if
not
impossible,
to
implement
and
execute
on
and
the
cost
for
doing
so
in
terms
of
finances.
M
Human
hours
and
the
anticipated
impact
on
all
manner
of
services
are
hard
to
calculate.
In
addition,
because
the
process
for
the
continued
use
of
technology,
the
introduction
of
new
is
fairly
long
and
involved
with
concern
that
it
might
significantly
slow
down
responsiveness,
we're
also
concerned
the
process
might
threaten
to
disincentivize
innovation
and
progress.
The
path
forward
is
too
difficult
time
consuming
costly
or
uncertain.
M
These
effects
aren't
localized
to
any
one
department
or
agency,
but
felt
throughout
the
city
government,
from
public
health
and
safety
to
education
and
transportation,
climate
resiliency,
urban
planning,
equity
and
housing.
There's
not
an
area
of
city
government
that
isn't
utilizing
technology
and
data
to
deliver
services,
to
constantly
improve
them,
to
inform
decision
making
and
to
measure
outcomes.
The
technologies
we
rely
on
are
often
multi-use
tools
that
overlap
and
share
space
with
one
another.
M
These
same
technologies
that
are
used
to
improve
transportation,
education,
climate,
climate,
resiliency
measure
where
our
efforts
at
equity
succeed
or
fall
short,
protect.
The
public
safety,
ensure
the
public
health
and
so
much
more
also
share
space
space
with
and
give
rise
to
legitimate
questions
about
how
we
protect
people's
privacy
interests
and
civil
rights.
M
We
need
to
be
incredibly
careful
and
thoughtful
about
how
we
approach
them
so
that,
even
as
we
strive
to
protect
privacy
rights
that
we
don't
do
damage
to
our
ability
to
deliver
high
quality
and
effective
services,
the
consequence
of
any
policy
changes
that
affect
the
health,
the
safety,
the
education,
the
myriad
of
the
services
on
which
the
public
relies.
I
think
you
need
to
be
really
fully
understood
and
communicated
before
they
occur.
I'd
respectfully
suggest
this
requires
more
conversation
and
exploration
of
each
of
these
levels
than
has
occurred.
M
Our
fears
that
the
costs
and
the
workouts
to
implement
and
stay
in
compliance
with
the
ordinance
are
again
incalculably
high.
I'm
not
trying
to
be
alarmist
but
realistic,
so
we
thought
it
might
be
useful
to
the
conversation
today
if
people
heard
from
some
of
the
men
and
women
who
do
the
actual
work
every
day
to
speak,
to
the
practical
challenge,
anticipate
from
the
proposed
ordinance
and
how
they
carry
out
their
missions
and
deliver
services
to
the
city,
they'll
also
speak
to
work
already
underway
to
ensure
that
privacy
rights
are
protected
and
respected.
M
Again,
this
is
just
a
small
cross-section
of
the
administration.
Virtually
every
department
will
be
impacted,
some
much
more
than
others,
so
our
concerns
are
by
no
means
limited
to
these
entities.
As
I
said,
technology
and
data
are
now
foundational
to
city
government
interwoven
into
every
aspect
of
the
things
that
we
do.
M
A
M
A
D
A
Thank
you
very
much
counselor
baker,
okay,
in
terms
of
the
folks
who
are
to
testify
shortly
about
the
practical
implications
I
do
intend
to
get
to
the
language
of
this.
So
if
you
can
make
your
comments
direct
and
brief,
and
and
if
you
have
any
specific
language
that
you
are
also
concerned
about,
that
would
be
very
helpful
as
well
as
to
why
you
feel
a
specific
section
or
specific
definition
or
specific,
instead
of
talking
about
the
whole
ordinance
as
a
whole
concept.
A
C
N
N
Superintendent
cassellius
has
been
a
leader
around
this
initiative
and
has
really
pushed
the
district
to
a
point
where
we
are
now
I'm
here
to
join
with
my
other
colleagues
from
bost
public
schools,
neva
coakley,
rice,
our
chief
of
safety
services,
as
well
as
mark
racine
who's,
the
director
of
our
oit
department
technology
department
just
provide
some
general
information.
You
know
any
and
all
of
our
cameras
in
in
or
on
our
building
the
solution
to
support
the
safety
of
the
students
and
promote
the
security
of
our
buildings.
N
The
policy
restricts
the
use
of
internal
safety
reports
that
the
safety
services
officers
can
produce
they're
limited
to
sick,
assists
medical
emergencies
missing
children
or
students
that
do
not
or
incidents
that
do
not
involve
student
activities
such
as
graffiti
on
property
or
vandalism.
It
restricts
the
types
of
student
conduct
for
which
safety
service
employees
may
prepare
and
file
a
bpd,
one-month
report.
N
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
make
sure
that
student
discipline
issues
are
treated
as
such
and
not
lead
down
the
path
of
a
criminal
record
incident
reports
may
never
contain
information
about
students,
including
immigration
status,
citizenship,
national
origin,
ethnicity,
native
or
spoken
language
or
suspected
gang
affiliation.
So
we've
set
the
policy
with
those
information
and
never
ever
contained
any
reports.
N
The
policy
eliminates
the
practice
of
repairing
intelligence
reports.
Safety
services.
Employees
are
now
required
to
inform
school
administrators
prior
to
preparing
an
incident
report.
School
administrators
are
now
required
to
contact
effective
students
and
their
families
within
24
hours
of
receiving
of
receiving
such
notification,
and
the
policy
also
calls
for
a
monthly
meeting
with
the
superintendent
to
review
safety
service
data.
N
So
you
know
again
we're
here
to
advance
this
work
forward
and
we're
here
to
support
how
we
can,
but
we're
just
unclear
as
written
how
the
policy
would
do
that
so
mark
racine,
I,
like
I
said,
is
here
to
talk
about
the
various
technology
efforts
in
bost,
public
schools
and
nemo
closely
guys
this
year
as
well
to
talk
about
how
the
policy
be
implemented
and
with
regard
to
our
officers
and
support
as
best
possible.
Thank
you.
O
No
thank
you,
madam
chair
I'll.
Get
back
to
the
conversation
just
have
been
in
support
of
this
ish.
This
work
since
years
ago,
when
councilor
wu
and
council
mccarthy-
and
I
held
the
initial
conversation
on
this
so
fully
supportive
here
to
listen
and
hopefully
support
in
any
way.
I
can
thank
you
to
everyone
for
participating
today.
P
P
P
P
If,
coupled
with
other
data
sets,
I
think
this
is
this
needs
a
lot
of
additional
exploration.
There's
a
lot
of
the
data.
We're
collecting
about
flows
of
people
at
large
through
the
city
is
not
data.
That
would
necessarily
be
individually
identifiable,
but
I
think
this
is
an
example
of
where
that
definition
might.
It
might
involve,
or
might
include
that
data,
if
that,
if
the
data
sets
that
we're
collecting
are
then
coupled
with
with
other
information
that
is
brought
in
for
the
analysis.
P
P
That
would
be
responding
to
an
rfp
or
we
are
seeking
approval
after
going
through
the
rfp
process,
which
may
have
which
probably
has
its
own
implications
anyway,
those
were
just
some
of
the
quick
ones
I
wanted
to
flag
from
from
an
operational
standpoint,
we've
done
and
are
doing
and
continue
to
do,
sort
of
a
lot
of
work
in
this
area
in
large
part
and
with
great
leadership
by
the
team
for
the
mayor's
office
of
neuromechanics.
So
look
forward
to
this
conversation.
Q
Q
It
is
to
our
core
belief
that
data
should
only
be
collected
if
it
serves
a
public
good
and
serves
a
public
purpose
and
to
and
that
data
that
is
collected
must
be
stored
securely
and
must
be
limited
to
ensure
privacy
and
must
comply
with
all
current
pii
or
personally
identifiable
information
security
standards.
In
an
effort
to
protect
personal
identity,
do
it
does
not
collect,
could
do
it
does
not
currently
collect
control
or
analyze
data
for
the
purpose
of
individual
surveillance.
Q
We
all
take
this
responsibility
very
seriously,
and
it's
to
that
end
that
we
need
to
continue
to
be
transparent,
accountable
and
for
what
data
is
being
collected
in
the
data
privacy
useful
space.
The
optimal
framework
is
to
recognize
the
data
privacy.
Protections
must
keep
on
pace
with
innovation
in
boston
and
across
the
u.s.
Q
The
where,
where
do
it
is
specifically
focused
and
where
our
questions
mostly
lie,
is
the
role
of
do
it
in
supporting
all
the
city
departments
that
are
on.
This
call
today
is
really
the
understanding
between
the
data,
custodians
and
the
data
owners
and
the
pro
and
the
providers,
and
where
that
responsibility,
and
where
that
delineation
line
is
set,
as
we
support
all
of
our
city
services,
with
with
the
storage
of
the
data,
with
the
connection
with
wireless
and
really
understand
where
that
change
is
going
to
going
to
come
about.
Q
R
Good
morning
counselors,
this
is
david
leonard
president
of
the
boston
public
library.
I
believe
I'm
I'm
next
good
morning
to
you
all.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
offer
a
statement
as
president
of
the
boston
public
library.
It
is
my
job
to
not
only
implement
policies
set
by
the
administration,
but
also
inform
the
trustees
of
the
library
with
regard
to
any
matters
pertaining
to
the
care
of
our
collections,
our
spaces
and
in
particular,
as
it
relates
to
today's
conversation
patron
privacy.
R
C
S
S
Prior
to
these
efforts,
we
did
some
scoping
work
on
technologies
deployed
in
our
streets,
skies
and
sewers
to
better
understand
the
scale
of
time
and
resources
that
would
be
needed
to
collect
and
centralize
an
asset
database
and
for
this
audit
exercise
we
work
with
a
dozen
different
city
departments
to
understand
their
use
of
technology
in
the
public
realm
while
and
while
important.
I
think
that,
after
spending
a
number
of
months
on
it,
I
realized
that
that
is
not
a
small
undertaking
by
any
means
and
would
require
budgeted
resources
to
complete
right
now.
S
That's
requested
of
vendors
who
are
deploying
new
technologies
in
public
space,
and
this
community
engagement
seeks
to
make
the
technology
collected
data
the
projected
use
of
the
data
transparent
and
accessible
to
everyone
and,
most
importantly,
the
work
seeks
to
promote
more
cultural
awareness,
around
technology
and
data
and
related
challenges
so
that
the
city's
residents
can,
you
know,
more
knowledgeably
and
increasingly
hold
public
servants
accountable
to
the
use
of
that
data.
That's
collected
in
the
public,
right-of-way
and
so
moving
on
to
some
of
the
challenges
that
we
specifically
see
with
this
ordinance.
S
Perhaps
the
biggest
concern
to
the
work
of
monum,
however,
is
on
the
impact
to
our
collaborations,
with
researchers
on
grant
proposals
and
other
prototype
projects
with
relatively
small
budgets
and
really
short
timelines.
So
our
approach
to
working
with
universities
and
startups
has
been
recognized
globally
as
a
leader
in
the
smart
city,
space
and
keys
on
the
significant
strength
of
boston
as
an
idea
hub.
S
This
ordinance
creates
some
significant
reductions
in
the
pace
with
which
we
would
be
able
to
react
to
the
evolving
word
world
of
technology
and
inhibit
our
our
learning
that
we'll
be
able
to
do
on
experimental
technology
through
small-scale
deployments,
and
you
know
some
other
departments
who
aren't
here,
who
would
be
impacted
by
this.
You
know
range
from
everything,
from
public
health,
environment
and
parks,
energy,
libraries
who
did
speak
earlier,
so
that's
just
kind
of
a
broad
snapshot
of
all
the
different
unforeseen
challenges.
S
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I'm
inclined
to
maybe
turn
it
over
for
some
quick
comments
or
responses.
Maybe
from
the
advocates
I
don't
know
to
the
co-sponsors
if
it
makes
sense
to
kind
of
hear
their
response
or
concerns
or
their
own
suggestions
for
language
and
then
open
up
to
all
of
the
counselors
to
go
through
a
couple
rounds.
I
see
kim
councillor.
A
Janie
is
saying
yes,
counselor
arroyo,
mejia,
okay,
all
right,
then
so
I
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
I
know
that
we
had
folks
testify
before
I
don't
know
of
the
advocates.
If
you
had
a
specific
order
or
if
you
had
some
language
suggestions,
we
can
start
with
the
team
from
the
aclu
and
then
we'll
go
to
gbls,
then
we'll
go
to
sim
and
unafraid
educators
and
I'll.
A
L
Great
thanks,
counselor
good
morning
everybody,
my
name
is
kade
crockford,
I'm
the
director
of
the
technology
for
liberty
program.
I
wasn't
expecting
that
this
would
sound
like
a
hearing
this
morning.
I
thought
this
was
a
working
session,
but
I've
heard
some
testimony
what
sounds
like
testimony
from
the
administration
so
I'll
just
maybe
take
a
couple
minutes
to
respond
to
some
of
those
points,
and
then
I'm
gonna
turn
it
over
to
emiliano
falcone
murano
from
my
office,
who
can
talk
through
some
of
the
actual
language,
but
you
know
I
I.
L
I
I
don't
think
that
they
necessarily
outweigh
the
importance
of
the
ordinance
or
or
that
your
concerns
necessarily
mean
that
the
ordinance
would
impact
your
work
in
the
way
that
you
think,
but
they're
important,
they're,
obviously
important
issues
to
raise.
So
I
just
want
to
go
through
a
couple
of
them.
L
First
off
just
as
a
general
matter.
We
understand
on
the
advocate
side
that
particularly
the
surveillance
oversight.
Section
of
this
ordinance
creates
new
bureaucracy
for
the
administration,
totally
get
that
that
has
been
the
case
everywhere.
These
ordinances
have
passed
all
over
the
country,
including
in
cambridge
and
somerville.
Our
neighbors
right
here
in
massachusetts,
larger
cities
as
well,
though,
have
passed
ordinances
like
this
seattle
was
the
first
seattle
passed
an
ordinance
like
this.
L
I
want
to
say
six
or
seven
years
ago
and
has
been
you
know,
implementing
it
effectively
ever
since
the
city
of
san
francisco,
a
city
of
about
the
same
size
as
boston,
slightly
larger,
passed
an
ordinance
like
this,
I
think
last
summer.
So
in
any
event,
this
is
certainly
a
bureaucratic
burden.
You
know
we're
not
going
to
pretend
that
it's
not
on
the
advocate
side.
We
do
believe,
however,
that
democracy
requires
hard
work.
L
So,
having
said
that,
you
know
I
really
for
those
of
you
who
are
concerned
in
the
administration
about
the
bureaucratic
burden
that
this
is
going
to
place
on
your
agencies.
I
really
would
encourage
you
to
reach
out
to
officials
in
san
francisco
in
seattle,
closer
to
home
here
in
cambridge
and
somerville,
to
get
a
sense
from
them
about
what
it's
been
like.
The
cambridge
and
somerville
ordinances
are
very,
very
close
to
the
language.
L
L
So
it's
not
as
if,
if
the
ordinance
passes
next
week,
you
know
you
have
to
have
all
your
documents
into
the
council
in
a
in
a
week
a
month,
even
two
months,
you
have
close
to
a
year
to
comply
at
the
outset,
so
we
think
that
that's
that's
a
reasonable
amount
of
time
that
that,
should
you
know,
provide
the
city
with
plenty
of
time
to
do
its
due
diligence
and
get
the
information
that
you
need
to
to
the
council
and
to
the
public.
You
know
the
final
thing
I'll
say
about
about
time.
L
Is
that
the
fact
that
this
ordinance
is
concerning
to
the
administration
with
respect
to
the
bureaucratic
burden?
That's
it's
going
to
place
on
your
agencies.
I
think
to
me,
is
a
real
indication
of
this
ordinance
that,
to
me
indicates
that
there's
a
lot
of
surveillance
going
on
in
the
administration
that
the
public's,
not
aware
of
that
the
council
is
not
aware
of,
and
that
doesn't
mean
that
those
surveillance
programs
are
inappropriate.
L
So
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
information
gathering
going
on
in
government
and
it's
important
not
only
for
democracy
and
for
privacy,
for
people
through
the
council
to
have
an
opportunity
to
engage
with
that
process
and
to
have
some
control
over
it.
But
frankly
it
also,
I
think,
will
help
government
do
a
better
job
internally
of
making
sure
that
accidents
like
that
btd
license
plate
reader
data
snafu
do
not
happen.
This
is
an
important
check.
L
Both
you
know
internally
in
the
administration,
and
I
think
for
the
public
for
for
all
of
us
to
go
to
go
before
the
council.
So
I'll
just
say
a
couple
more
things.
You
know
on
the
question
of
identifiable
data
chief
osgood,
you
raised
that
concern.
You
know
we
are
concerned
about
the
the
government's
use
of
cell
phone
location
data,
for
example.
L
You
know
I'd
like
to
know
when
my
cell
phone
location
data
is
being
used
by
which
city
agencies
for
what
purposes-
and
it
absolutely
is
the
case
as
you
highlight
that
you
know,
for
example,
cell
phone
location
data
could
be
used
to
identify
me
personally
and
to
track
my
movements
throughout
the
city
when
combined
with
my
home
address,
for
example,
that's
information
that
the
council
deserves
to
know
that
the
public
deserves
to
know.
We
need
to
know
how
that
information
is
being
secured.
L
You
know
where
the
city
is
getting
it
from
who
has
access
to
it,
but
what
types
of
controls
are
limiting
that
access,
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
there
isn't.
You
know
a
horrible
tragedy
that
results
from
you
know
someone
inappropriately
getting
access
to
that
information
and
using
it
for
their
own
personal
purposes
for
abuse
or
misuse.
So
I
think
that's
a
really.
That's
a
really
important
part
of
the
ordinance
actually,
and
you
know
I'll,
just
close
by
saying
naeli.
L
You
know
I
hear
what
you're
saying:
I'm
not
sure
what
your
title
is.
I'm
sorry,
so
I'm
just
gonna
use
your
first
name.
I
hear
what
you're
saying
about
about
all
of
the
work
that
the
city
has
been
engaged
in
in
terms
of
getting
a
sense
internally
on
what's
going
on
across
departments,
and
I
would
just
say
that
all
we're
asking
for
here
is
for
you
to
share
that
information
with
the
council.
So
so
it
actually
sounds
like
you've
done
a
lot
of
this
work.
L
It
sounds
like
you're
engaged
in
a
lot
of
this
work
already.
What
we
want
to
do
is
bring
the
public
and
the
council
into
that
process
and
give
the
council
and
the
public
a
chance
to
have
some
control
over
what's
going
on
behind
closed
doors
in
the
administration.
So
with
that
I'll.
Just
thank
you
all
again.
L
T
Thank
you,
kade
hi,
thank
you
counselors
for
having
us
here.
Thank
you
for
the
administration
for
coming
to
this
working
session.
So
now
I'm
going
to
speak
about
the
summary
of
the
proposed
amendments
to
the
ordinance
that
we
all
shared
with
you.
So
the
system
is
like.
I
will
read
the
amendments
and
then
the
other
participants
in
the
panel
will
explain,
explain
them.
T
T
Not
only
incident
related
and
mentions
that
these
reports
are
all
those
reports
that
are
not
considered
an
educational
record
under
ferpa,
f,
f,
erp,
the
federal
law
aboard
education
records.
The
proposed
definition
also
mentions
that
informal
emails
texts
and
other
electronic
messages
that
describe
or
contain
details
pertaining
to
student
activity
are
going
to
be
considered
student
reports.
T
The
fifth
one
is
the
creation
of
the
of
a
new
category
called
historic
student
reports
to
name
those
reports
created
before
the
enactment
of
this
ordinance.
This
in
section
16,
63,
63
2.
Also.
The
sixth
amendment
is
the
replacement
of
the
term
seriously
body
harm
with
serious
bodily
harm
in
section
16
63.2.
T
T
T
The
language
proposed
is
broader
and
encompasses
the
address
and
or
neighborhood
of
residents
change.
Number
10
10
amendment
of
the
language
related
to
gang
involvement
in
section
16,
63
4,
a
3.
The
language
proposed
is
brother
and
encompasses
all
the
ways
in
which
the
noting
of
gang
involvement
can
affect.
Students,
change
number
11.
T
As
will
be
explained
later,
student
rights
advocates
recommended
that
this
category
should
be
included
and
reported
to
analyze
whether
certain
students
from
some
ethnicities
are
more
reported
than
others
change
number
12
addition
of
new
paragraphs,
4
and
5
in
section
1663
4a
to
clarify
the
roles
of
the
principals
and
headmasters
of
the
schools.
These
new
subsections
also
establish
a
process
by
which
they
have
to
send
a
student
report
to
the
student
and
their
family
change
number
13.
T
This
is
the
general
rule,
then
the
only
two
exceptions
are
when
the
transmission
or
sharing
is
done.
First,
pursuant
to
section
1663,
4c
or
in
exigent
circumstances
pursuant
to
section
1663,
4d
change.
Number
14
relates
to
these
two
previous
sections,
so
the
there
are
new
to
the
two
new
sections
are
1663
4c
and
1663
4d.
T
These
sections
create
a
detailed
process
of
information
sharing.
First,
there
is
the
establishment
of
two
different
frameworks
for
sharing
information
and
the
first
one
that
we
can
call
an
ordinary
one.
That
applies
to
all
cases
where
the
information,
the
sharing
of
information,
is
required
by
law
or
accepted
by
this
ordinance,
and
the
second
one
is
when
there
are
exigent
circumstances.
T
Among
other
things,
the
proposed
language
first
shows
that
the
explanation
received
by
the
students
and
parents
should
relate
to
why
the
student
report
is
being
sent
to
the
boston
police
department.
It
also
incorporates
the
headmasters
and
the
principles
as
an
essential
part
of
the
process
of
information
sharing,
and,
finally,
it
ensures
that
the
families
of
the
students
have
participation
participation
in
the
process,
even
in
those
cases
when
there
are
exigent
circumstances.
T
The
only
change
here
is
that
when
there
are
excellent
circumstances,
the
practice
the
family
participation
comes
after
the
information
was
sharing
logically
because
of
the
existence
of
exigent
circumstances,
change
number
15.
There
is
a
new
section
1663
for
e
that
prohibits
school
police
officers
from
attending
any
meetings
where
officers
or
employees
from
us,
immigration
and
custom
customs
enforcement
eyes
are
present
either
in
person
or
virtually
change
number
16.
T
There
are
new
representatives
for
the
community
information
sharing
board
in
section
1663
4g,
the
new
language
incorporates
a
parent
or
guardian
chosen
by
the
boston,
special
education,
parent
advisory
council,
a
representative
chosen
by
the
code
of
conduct
advisory
council
and
a
representative
of
the
district
english
learning
advisory
committee.
The
e
l
ac
change
number
17
is
the
inclusion
of
ethnicity
in
the
categories
in
the
categories
of
information
that
have
to
be
reported
to
the
board
pursuant
to
1663
for
g3.
T
T
Yes-
and
there
was
one
more
thing
which
this
new
section
1663
8-
creates
a
framework
for
disposing
and
eliminating
all
the
student
reports,
the
historic
student
reports
that
do
not
conform
with
the
language,
with
the
language
of
this
ordinance,
while
respecting
the
state
law
mandated
retention
of
records.
Yes,
I
think
that
this
thank
you
chair.
I
think
that
this
document
was
sent
to
you.
T
T
Yes,
the
I
can
tell
you
if
you
want
the
the
name
of
the
document
so
that
you
can
find
it
one.
Second,
the
name
of
the
document
is
substantive
amendments
20684,
that's
the
original
document
that
I
was
reading.
Thank
you
so
much.
The
only
thing
is
that
I
change
the
references
to
the
chapters
in
that
document.
You
will
have
the
references
to
the
ordinance
like
section
y
section,
one
section,
two
section
three-
and
this
is
the
final
red
line
with
all
the
formats
included.
All
the
format
changes
included.
A
No,
no,
you
did
an
excellent
job.
I
I
forgot
to
announce
that
it
had
been
sent
around
my
apologies
and
thank
you
so
much
for
your
thorough.
You
came
here
to
work
in
this
session.
Thank
you
so
much
and
I
do
do
appreciate
by
the
way
for
the
administration
who
pointed
to
specific
sections
that
were
concerned
about
the
practical
implementation.
T
A
L
L
U
U
We
have
I've
yet
to
see
a
single
communication
where
an
urgent
situation
was
dealt
with.
It
is
generally
the
nature
of
digging
for
information
to
criminalize
boston,
public
school
students,
and
I
have
not
seen,
as
I
said,
a
situation
that
required
urgent
communication
between
those
agencies.
Bps
brick
and
the
ice
emiliano
mentioned
a
few
provisions
regarding
historic
information
and
and
how
the
city
should
address
those
historic
reports,
which
I
think
is
what
folks
were
interested
in
me
addressing
so
I'll.
Try
to
do
that.
U
Briefly,
the
we
become
aware,
through
our
own
practice,
as
immigration
advocates
and
through
document
production,
that
there
are
large
chunks
of
you
know.
I
don't
know.
Intelligence
reports
face
sheets
write-ups,
whatever
you
want
to
call
them
produced,
principally
by
boston
school
resource
officers,
and
the
city
has
yet
to
address
where
those
historic
reports
are
housed.
It's
been
suggested
just
in
people's
emails
on
maybe
you
know,
google
drives
that
people
have
created.
U
U
A
V
W
Yeah
sure
I'll
speak
to
a
few
amendments
that
really
stand
out
to
me
so
hi
everyone,
my
name,
is
sabrina
barros,
I'm
the
lead
organizer
for
the
student
immigrant
movement
so
like
I
mentioned
particularly
for
me.
Some
of
the
amendments
that
I
would
like
to
speak
on
today
are
for
me.
These
go
together.
W
For
me,
they
stand
out
because,
like
my
colleagues
have
mentioned,
and
my
other
partners
in
this
work,
this
process
of
information
sharing
has
been
completely
unregulated
and
is
completely
immoral
one
for
the
protection
of
our
youth
and
for
our
families.
So
when
I
read
number
seven
in
regards
to
that
school
police
officers
shall
only
collect,
store
information
or
share
information
pertaining
to
students
by
creating
and
sharing
student
reports
in
accordance
with
the
ordinance.
W
It's
that,
for
example,
we've
seen
reports
and
communication
that
happens
and
unfolds
informally
through
email
without
there
being
a
report
that
is
written,
there
will
be
information
shared
about
a
young
person
about
maybe
what
they're
wearing
a
whole
a
whole
variety
of
things
that
are
being
reported
on
without
a
formal
report
being
written.
If
the
situation
is
that
serious
right,
so
this
type
of
information
sharing
is
completely
wrong
to
do
in
the
first
place
and
then
in
regards
to
13
to
provide
rules
regarding
the
process
for
information
sharing.
W
So
this
more
directly
talks
about
how
the
process
of
sharing
should
have
like
would
be
happening.
So,
like
elizabeth
badger
had
explained
right
like
and
how
I
was
just
talking
about
this
whole
informal
process,
there
needs
to
actually
be
transparency
and
accountability
for
the
type
of
information
that
is
being
collected
and
shared
right.
So
this
is
not
only
limited
to
right,
like
phone
calls
or
or
text
messages
or
putting
it
on
a
database
right
we're
talking
about.
W
W
Young
people
are
literally
being
criminalized
when
there
is
no
real
evidence
to
be
used
against
them,
they
will
acquire
repo
when
a
school
police
officer
calls
them
a
gang
affiliate
right.
So
by
no
real
evidence,
just
someone
saying,
oh,
I
believe
this
person
is
a
gang
member
right.
You
are
literally
damaging
someone's
life
and
we
have.
We
have
real
evidence
to
show
that
this
has
negatively
impacted
the
lives
of
young
people.
W
So
you
know
this
is
very,
very
important
language
that
must
be
included
that
must
be
written
out
so
that
it's
no
longer
a
practice,
and
we
know
that
this
happens.
We
know
that
young
people
are
constantly
being
referred
to
as
gang
affiliates
and
gang
members,
so
there
really
does
need
to
be
a
serious
conversation
or
in
regard
right
like
there
needs
to
be
written
language.
W
So,
for
example,
there
are
white
latinos
right
the
same
way
that
there
are
black
latinos.
There
are
people
who
look
like
me,
who
are
brown
right
so
in
using
the
the
an
in
using
ethnicity
in
student
reports
right
it's.
It
might
be
so
that
it
can
be
skewed
so
where
there
are
many
white
passing
latinos,
they
might
be
written
out
as
white
and
again
right.
This
can
skew
the
the
actual
way
we
are
analyzing.
W
I
already
spoke
about
this
one,
my
bad
y'all
and
so
for
14.,
new
section,
1663,
4c
and
4d.
That
creates
a
detailed
process
of
information
sharing,
and
this
was
what
emiliano
had
spoken,
where
there
would
be
two
frameworks,
one
that
is,
for
you
know,
things
that
are
mandated
by
the
state,
things
that
are
required
by
law
and
then
the
other
for
extended
circumstances.
W
W
There
was
no
transparency
or
in
involvement
of
family
with
families
and
the
young
people
involved,
so
reports
would
be
made
and
stored
and
shared
and
young
people
and
their
families
would
have
no
clue
that
these
reports
were
being
written
and
shared
with
the
bpd
and
then
in
turn,
criminalizing
them.
So
you
know
using
this
proper
language
to
be
able
to
speak
about
one
being
able
to
have
this
information
be
shared
with
the
student
so
that
they
understand
what
is
happening.
W
X
X
I'm
sorry
that
I
won't
be
able
to
stay,
because
I
was
really
hoping
to
be
part
of
the
discussion
on
the
language.
So
I'm
going
to
just
talk
very
briefly.
I
want
to
address
the
fact
that
bps
did
has
a
similar
policy
myself
valeria
elena
elizabeth
and
liz
were
all
part
of
the
process
of
creating
it
in
all
expressed
arts.
X
Our
concerns
numerous
times
to
mr
dipina
and
the
rest
of
the
bps
staff
around
our
our
policies,
and
we
sent
a
document
that
hopefully
went
out
to
all
the
counselors,
comparing
the
two
policies
and
how
they,
how
the
bps
policy
really
does
not
fully
protect
the
students
in
our
care.
If
you'd
like
me
to
talk
more
about
that,
I'm
happy
to
when
the
time
comes,
but
hopefully
you've
got
that
policy.
I
just
want
to
talk
about
a
couple.
More
amendments
I
want
to
talk
about.
X
The
idea
that
the
police,
which
we
know
are
are
communicating
with
ice,
can
get.
The
address
of
a
student
is
frankly
terrifying
to
students
in
section
12.
One
thing
that
we
tried
to
do
is
really
also
address
what
happens
with
with
schools
that
don't
have
school
police
officers.
I
know
that
only
55
of
our
schools
do
have
it.
X
So
if,
if
what
are
the
regulations
on
head
masters,
heads
of
schools
and
principals
as
they
share
as
they
communicate
with
the
police,
because
we
know
that
there
are
many,
I
know
that
there
are
floating
school
police
officers
that
do
come
in,
but
also
sometimes
that
that
heads
of
schools
are
communicating
directly
talking
directly
with
the
police
and
so
adding
that
information
and
and
also
establishing
a
framework
number
14
as
establishing
a
framework
for
extinguishing
circumstances.
Because
we
realize
that
there's
times
when
they,
when
you
know,
there's
an
urgent
situation.
X
You
can't
have
those
conversations
yet,
but
still
making
sure
that
families
are
informed,
that
that
we're
centering
the
students
and
their
families
in
the
work
that
we're
doing.
And
finally,
I
think
elizabeth
talked
to
section
15,
but
you
know
making
sure
that
that
are
that
our
our
school
employees
are
not
in
regular
meetings
or
in
conversations
with
with
ice
officials.
I
think
it's
very
important
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
other
questions,
and
then
I
think
liz
is
next
and
then
I
think
we'll
be
done.
Y
Yeah
thanks
norah,
so
I'm
elizabeth
mcintyre,
I'm
a
lawyer,
greater
boston,
legal
services.
We
represent
low-income
young
people
of
color
in
school
discipline
and
related
special
ed
cases.
So
I'm
here
mostly
to
talk
about
the
bps
portion
of
this
ordinance,
and
I
wanted
to
just
touch
on
a
couple
of
amendments.
One
is
in
section
five
and
point
out
sort
of
the
some
of
the
differences
between
the
policy
that
bps
has
just
passed
and
what's
proposed
in
this
ordinance.
Y
So
one
is
in
section
5.1.1
where
we're
talking
about
under
what
circumstances
student
reports
or
vpd
one
ones
can
be
created.
So
the
current
bps
policy
here
allows
for
one
ones
to
be
created
in
cases
of
just
assault,
assault
and
battery
assault
doesn't
even
require
any
kind
of
you
know,
physical
contact.
Y
So,
for
example,
like
I
represented
a
student
once
who
was
she's
nine,
she
was
running
she
knocked
over
a
chair
and
the
chair
landed
near
a
school
police
officer
and
a
report
was
generated,
so
that
would
still
be
allowed
under
boston's
current
policy,
but
not
with
the
language
here
which,
instead
of
thinking
about
this
in
terms
of
criminality
as
in
is
this
a
felony.
Is
this
a
misdemeanor?
The
language
in
this
ordinance
really
looks
at
like
what
is
the
harm
that
was
done
and
how
you
know
what?
Y
Y
You
know
I
had
a
case
where
a
young,
a
young
man
who
had
a
developmental
delay
who
was
became,
escalated
in
sort
of
the
common
area
of
a
bps
high
school
and
while
he
was
escalated
and
he
was
with
a
paraprofessional,
he
said
that
he
was
going
to
bring
the
ocean
in
to
flood
the
school
and
kill
everyone
in
the
school,
and
the
police
officer
heard
this
and
wrote
a
report.
He
ended
up
having
to
go
to
a
clerk
magistrates
hearing
there
was
an
open
cra.
Y
It
became
this
just
and
and
had
the
officer
talked
to
the
head
of
school,
they
would
have
known
like
no,
no,
no,
he
has
an
iep
like.
Obviously
he
can't
bring
the
ocean
to
flood
the
school.
This
is
not
a
law
enforcement
issue.
This
is
a
special
ed
issue
and
it
could
have
been
resolved
and
it
said
it
became
this
incredibly
traumatic
event
in
this
child's
life.
Y
C
A
Very
much
so
what
we'll
probably
do
now
is
go
in
order
of
arrival
are
starting
with
the
co-sponsors
for
suggestions,
concerns
questions
about
language
specifically
in
the
ordinance,
and
what
I
would
really
try
to
do
is
keep
keep
my
colleagues
in
line
for
from
moving
forward
the
conversation
I
will
say
for
the
administration.
Thank
you
so
much
for
kind
of
summarizing.
Some
of
your
concerns.
I
I
did
find
the
letter
and
it
there
was
no
real
citation
to
the
charter
or
to
what
would
what
made
the
overall
issue
of
it
unconstitutional.
A
It
just
was
there's
concerns,
and
so
I
appreciate
those
concerns,
but
I
think,
if
there's
a
genuine,
I
don't
want
to
call
it
an
olive
branch,
but
a
genuine
attempt
to
move
this
conversation
forward,
as
everyone
from
the
administration
testified.
They're
excited
about
moving
this
conversation
forward,
I'm
excited
about
having
it,
then.
I
really
think
there
should
be
a
genuine
attempt
to
talk
about
the
language
and
to
provide
a
markup
of
the
concerns
of
the
language
and
provide
alternatives
for
that
language.
A
I
think
that
that
that
would
indicate
to
me
there's
a
real
want
to
move
this
conversation
forward
and
it's
worth
either
having
subsequent
working
sessions
and
looking
into
the
new
year
for
passing
this.
But
if
there's
no,
no
actual
push
concern
or
written
suggestions,
I
mean
we
just
heard
about
a
lot
of
them
for
the
first
time
today
or
concerns
that
it
really
does
make
myself
and
possibly
some
of
my
other
colleagues
wonder
if
there's
a
genuine
want
to
do
this
and
get
this
get
this
done.
A
In
short,
you
know
put
up
something,
so
we
can
continue
this
conversation,
but
if
you
don't,
then
then
I
think
the
conversation
will
have
to
go
without
you,
and
I
don't
want
that
so
so,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
now
over
to
the
colleague,
my
colleagues,
my
co-spon,
the
co-sponsors
and
my
colleagues
to
ask
any
questions
that
they
have.
Some
of
my
colleagues
had
to
leave
early
and
they'll
submit
them
in
writing
to
me
later,
but
I
want
to
thank
them
all
for
coming
so
counselor
wu,
counselor,
arroyo
and
counselor
janie.
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
you
know,
I
don't
have
too
too
much
to
add.
I
was
going
to
say
everything
that
you
just
said,
which
is
that
we
didn't
hear
very
many
specifics
today
in
terms
of
what
changes
might
be
proposed
and
it
feels
to
be
honest,
like
a
very
familiar
conversation
that
could
be
applied
across
nearly
any
of
the
ordinances
that
we
have
been
working
on
over
the
last
many
years
that
I
that
I've
been
at
this.
B
So
it's
really
at
the
stage
now
where
this
document
comes
from,
as
you've
heard
a
very
well
researched,
comprehensive,
significant
amount
of
time
from
all
of
the
advocates
working
with
other
municipalities
who
have
already
implemented
this.
So
some
of
the
more
vague
concerns
about
you
know,
legality
and
implementation.
We
we
have
wrestled
with,
and
we
have
thought
about
very
carefully
and
and
included
language
that
builds
on
the
experiences
of
other
municipalities,
including
in
massachusetts,
who
have
already
done
this.
So
you
know
I.
B
So
I'm
looking
forward
to
getting
to
that
stage,
because
I
think
we
still
need
to
recognize
at
this
moment
that
we
are
in
as
a
society
as
a
city
is
one
where
we
cannot
afford
to
continue
delaying
on
important
conversations
and
taking
action,
because
we
know
what
happens
when
we
delay.
We
know
there
are
consequences
that
continue
to
accrue
to
black
and
brown
communities
to
our
students,
and
we
have
put
forward
very
specific
protections
and
and
critical
changes
that
are
are
time
sensitive.
F
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
would
just
echo
you
know.
I
think
we
have.
I
didn't
count,
but
I
think
it's
about
six
plus
members
of
the
administration.
Here
we
had
none
for
the
hearing
and
many
of
the
administration.
Since
I've
been
here
for
these
ordinances
treat
working
sessions
like
their
hearings,
they
stonewall
them.
D
They
speak
about
things
that
should
have
been
spoken
about
at
a
hearing,
their
concerns,
their
thoughts,
the
things
that
they
think
about
without
any
which,
by
the
way,
I'm
happy
to
hear
your
concerns
and
your
thoughts
as
it
applies
to
the
language
that
we've
written,
not
as
it
applies
to
general
principles
of
you
know
things
you
would
speak
about
in
hearings
about
the
legality
and
all
this
other
stuff
when
we
don't
have
a
lawyer
here
represented
by
the
city,
to
even
speak
to
that.
So
you
know
the
reality
for
me.
D
Is
I
stand
by
this
ordinance?
I
think
it's
closely
crafted
to
the
language
we
want
it
to.
I
think
we
have
to
recognize
in
the
world
that
we
existed
now.
Surveillance
is
becoming
a
much
more
day-to-day
need
and
concern
for
people.
The
city
is
using
surveillance
and
technology
in
ways
that
I
think
is
it
may
be.
D
You
know
arguably
productive
and
helpful,
but
also
the
residents
have
a
right
to
know
about
that
and
how
that's
being
applied,
and
so
for
me,
I'm
happy
to
hear
any
questions
or
any
direct
references
to
language,
and
I
want
to
just
say
that
I
saw
chief
osgood
had
some
direct
reference
to
language,
and
so
thank
you
for
that.
But
I'm
happy
to
hear
anybody
who
wants
to
speak
directly
to
the
language.
I
don't
have
much
else
to
say.
E
I
appreciate
you
know
all
of
the
the
comments
that
have
been
given
during
this
working
session,
but
my
concern
is
that
it
is
not
moving
us
further
along
in
this
process.
You
know
the
letter
was
sent
prior
to
our
hearing,
which
we
did
not
have
representation
from
the
administration
attend.
The
hearing
and
the
letter
again
made
vague
references
to
legalities
and
and
coming
up
against
the
charter,
but
doesn't
cite
what
the
actual
issues
are.
E
I
was
hopeful
that
this
working
session
would
uncover
some
of
that
if
there
were
in
fact
legitimate
concerns
that
we
would
be
able
to
discuss
it
here.
That
is
not
the
case.
I
am
grateful
to
the
many
advocates
who
are
on
the
call
who
continue
to
do
the
work,
and
so
thank
you
for
the
one,
your
your
work
on
the
original
language,
but
also
you
know
as
we
work
through
this
process.
E
This
is
what
a
working
session
and
having
this
ordinance
you
know
moving
through
the
city
council
is
our
opportunity
to
make
sure
that
the
language
is
exactly
how
we
want
the
language
to
be,
and
so
advocates
continue
to
work
on
language,
and
I
appreciate
the
the
amendments
and
the
master
copy
and
all
the
documents
that
we
have.
I
guess
the
one
question
that
I
would
leave
for
the
administration.
E
E
From
the
administration
directly
to
the
advocates
on
some
of
the
language,
if
not,
then
again,
I
don't
want
to
take
time
here,
because
the
whole
goal
here
is
to
kind
of
get
down
in
the
weeds
of
the
language.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
producing
a
final
document
that
will
come
before
the
city
council
for
a
vote
and
before
the
mayor
for
his
signature.
E
So
if
there's
a
response
from
the
administration
to
the
advocates
on
what
the
advocates
have
shared
in
terms
of
additional
suggested
language,
I'd
be
interested
in
hearing
that
response,
if
not,
I'm
hopeful
that
we
will
be
able
to
through
the
committee
continue
to
work
on
this
important
ordinance.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
C
A
P
And
so
I
think
I
actually
really
appreciate
it.
I
think
I
totally
agree
with
the
issues
that
kade
raised
around
the
definition
in
1.3,
and
so
the
issue
is,
I
think,
not
the
way
in
which
the
definition
definition
is
shared,
but
because
so
much
of
the
there's
potential
data
that
is
collected
that
is
not
anonymized
that
when
it
is
combined,
could
be
de-anonymized.
P
I'm
not
sure
that
and-
and
I
might
be
wrong,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
the
current
ordinance
as
drafted
actually
really
wrestles
with
that,
and
I
think
that
might
be
in
section
it
could
be
wrong.
It
could
be
in
section
3.3
and
the
data
access
provision
in
there.
I
think
that
there's
we
would,
you
would
want.
I
think,
you'd
want
additional
language
to
be
able
to
address
that
or
it's
something
which
needs
to
be
amended
in
our
existing
open
and
protected
data
executive
ordinance.
So
there's
some
routes
to
go,
but
I
actually
agree.
P
Okay,
with
the
issues
that
you
flagged
and
the
issue
was
not
to
adjust
1.3,
but
it
was
to
figure
like
how
do
you
we
do
not
intend
it
with
so
much
of
the
mobility
data
to
actually
have
personally
identifiable
information.
But
I
recognize
exactly
the
issue
you
flagged
and
I
don't
think
that's
exactly
covered
in
this
ordinance
has
written
or
I
might
just
be
missing
how
it's
covered
or
how
it's
addressed.
A
N
N
A
N
So
the
only
people
that
can
share
information
outside
of
the
department
of
safety
services
is
the
chief
and
deputy
chief
and
that's
only
to
the
boston
police
liaison
to
the
school
unit
on
liaison
right.
So
that's
the
that's
ext
the
far
extent
it
goes,
and
no
all
individual
officers
can
share
any
information
outside
of
that
process
and
we've
tightened
that
up
with
this
policy.
N
I
also
want
to
call
out
the
school
heads
of
schools
are
now
required
to
have
these
conversations
prior
to
any
incident
report
being
written
and
have
those
communications
with
the
families
in
order
to
make
them
aware
of
the
incident
that
occurred
and
why
the
report
is
generated.
So
I
mean
my
my
suggestion
would
be
to
you
know,
adopt
the
language
that
we
have
in
our
policy,
because
it's
already
passed.
N
We've
had
months
and
months
of
conversation
and
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
we
landed
on
the
policy
that
we
have
now
and
we
recognize
the
fact
that
there
is
a
need
to
maybe
go
further
and
broader,
but
as
of
now,
this
is
where
our
policy
stands
and
we
have
created
a
forum
by
which
we
are
going
to
continue
to
engage
in
conversations
monitor
the
data
as
the
policy
is
written
and
once
we
get
a
chance
to
analyze
the
data
with
the
policy
is
currently
written.
We
are
open
to
making
more
changes
to
it.
N
X
Counselor
edwards,
I
know
that
you
wanted
all
the
administration's
questions,
but
I
have
to
go
to
class
in
three
minutes.
Could
I
quickly
respond
to
mr
depina's
comment
sure,
so
I
recognize
that
yes,
it
talks
about
information
being
shared
just
from
the
chief
of
police,
but
what
it?
What
my
huge
concern
is.
The
writing
of
bpd
1.1
reports,
which
is
is
like,
is
forgetting.
The
word
is
made
institutionalized
through
this
policy
and
those
reports
go
directly
to
bp
bpd,
and
you
have
told
me
numerous
meetings.
X
But
what
I'm
more
concerned
about
is
that
that
police
reports
are
written
with
no
oversight
and
there's
the
heads
of
schools
don't
get
to
see
them,
but
they
don't
get
to
say
this
incident
doesn't
require
a
a
police
report
and
shouldn't
be
reported.
They
don't
have
oversight
of
it.
No
one
has
oversight,
and
these
are
reports
going
straight
to
bpd.
N
So
if
I
could
respond
briefly
like
so
prior
to
this
policy,
that
communication
did
happen
informally,
but
our
current
policy
that
was
passed
in
september
requires
those
conversations
to
happen
and
those
discussions
to
be
had
prior
to
any
reports
being
written.
So
the
school
administration
does
not
have.
A
Well,
first,
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
our
unafraid
of
theater,
who
is
now
going
to
educate
our
folks
in
doing
her
wonderful
duty
as
a
teacher,
so
she
may
be
gone
already,
but
I
want
to
say
thank
you
so
much
for
that.
Yes,
counselor
rojo,
please
respond
and
then
I
do
want
to
get
to
councillor
braden
councillor
sabi
george
and
council
bot.
D
D
We
held
this
hearing
regarding
this
ordinance
where
the
administration
did
not
show,
and
we
asked
questions
about
bpd
and
bps's
involvement
in
bpd
1.1
reports
and
even
in
the
response
that
was
sent
to
us
about
how
many
it's
clear
it
says
in
the
actual
report,
bps
cannot.
I'm
quoting
bps
cannot
determine
an
accurate
number
of
reports
written
by
bpd
officers.
It
literally
says
it
in
the
report,
so
I
mean
that's
from
you
you
thank
you.
I
appreciate
it.
It
says
that
you
cannot
do
it
in
your
own.
Writing,
that's
not
opinion.
That's
not!
D
That's
not!
You
know
anything
beyond
that.
I
also
remember
that
I
asked
in
that
hearing
and
there's
footage
of
this.
I
asked
in
that
hearing
whether
or
not
an
administrator
could
stop
an
officer,
a
school
officer
from
sending
a
report.
They're
not
allowed
to
they're
actually
just
consented,
there's
actually
nothing
that
says
that
an
administrator
can
tell
a
bpd
officer
not
to
do
that
and
that
it
is
binding.
There's
nothing
that
does
that,
and
so
you
know.
D
I
appreciate
that
the
intent
of
the
bps
plan
was
to
protect
children
and
to
deal
with
loopholes
which,
by
the
way
they
should
have
because
bpd
was
reacting
and
speaking
to
brick
and
sending
things
to
bps
and
those
emails
and
all
those
things
that
happened
required
this
response.
So
the
response
was
appropriate.
The
issue
is,
it
doesn't
go
far
enough,
and
so,
when
we
talk
about
you
know
the
administration
has
a
say
they
have
no
say
they
get
informed.
D
There
is
no
say,
and
so
if
you
just
inform
somebody
we're
thinking
of
doing
this,
and
I
can
say
no
don't
do
that
and
you
can
still
do
it.
Then
that's
not
a
check,
it's
not
a
check,
and
so
I
I
recognize
that
you
know
we're
having
a
discussion
about
what
bps's
report
did,
and
I
recognize
that
you're
here
essentially
to
advocate
that
what
bps
did
is
far
enough
and
we
should
give
that
a
chance.
D
D
This
only
tightens
protections,
and
so,
unless
we're
saying
that
there's
such
thing
as
too
much
protection,
I
don't
actually
know
what
the
point
of
saying
bps
already
did
something.
Well,
this
goes
further,
and
so,
unless
you're
saying
we
shouldn't
go
further
to
protect
children.
I
I'd
like
to
hear
why
we
shouldn't
do
that,
because
I
haven't
heard
that
yet
what
I've
heard
is
we
already
do
this?
Well,
we
don't-
I
wouldn't
have
put
in
an
ordinance
if
we
already
did
it.
So
what?
What?
What
is
it
that
bps
thinks
we
should
do?
N
Also
roy
I
mean
our
position
is
that
we
have
looked
at
the
issue:
we've
engaged
in
conversations
both
with
partners,
family
stakeholders
and
develop
the
policy,
and
with
that
input
from
all
the
stakeholders
that
I
mentioned,
we
develop.
What
we
believe
is
a
safe
and
just
policy
that
will
protect
the
student
information
and
we
also
follow
our
ferpa
requirements.
N
With
regard
to
that,
so
I
welcome
the
opportunity
to
have
any
measures
that
can
further
keep
our
children
safe,
but
there
are
also
you
know,
requirements
that
boston,
police
have
and
school
police
have
of
writing
reports
that
we
can't
ignore
right.
So
our
policy
does
call
out
the
fact
that
you
know
we'd
want
to
decriminalize
a
lot
of
misdemeanor
behavior.
N
So
a
lot
of
people
are
victims
to
some
of
these
crimes,
and
these
victims
also
want
to
pursue
legal
action,
and
these
victims
also
want
to
be
protected
and
kept
safe.
So
we
believe
our
policy
balances
on
any
potential
perpetrators,
as
well
as
make
sure
that
victims
of
these
crimes
are
safe.
So
again,
our
position
is
that
we
have
a
policy.
I
appreciate
to
see
that
a
lot
of
what
we've
written
is
incorporated
in
this
ordinance.
A
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
to
everyone.
Who's
participating
this
morning.
There's
a
lot
to
unpack
here
and
there's
an
incredible
amount
of
discussion
about
bps
and,
and
rightly
so.
It's
a
scenario
of
great
concern.
I
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
the
broader
surveillance
implications
that
go
beyond
the
schools.
G
I
think
I
echo
chris
osgood's,
you
know
concern
about
merging
of
data,
I'd
love
to
get
my
head
around
broader
surveillance
applications
and
what
they
are
and
how
they're
being
used
in
the
city
and
and
how
those
that
information
has
been
shared
with
state
and
federal
agencies
and
authorities.
I
I
think
it's
almost
like.
We've
got
two
buckets
here.
G
We
have
very
specific
concerns
and
it
seems
like
90
percent
of
the
conversation
this
morning
has
been
about
schools
and
what
happens
in
schools
and
how
things
are
reported
in
schools
and
for
me
personally,
having
grown
up
in
northern
ireland,
which
I
would
call
a
police
state.
I
I
think,
surveillance.
G
The
broader
discussion
about
surveillance
needs
some
more
attention
as
well.
So
that's
more
of
a
comment
and
and
I'm
trying
to
just
unpack
all
the
information
it
seems
like
if
there
are
holes
in
the
bps
new
regulations
that
they
have
come
forward
with
them,
then
perhaps
those
this
this
ordinance
would
be
specifically
targeted
at
addressing
those
deficiencies,
but
I
think
in
the
broader
context
of
of
surveillance-
and
I
I
I
don't
think
we
have
gotten
done
a
deep
enough
dive
into
that
conversation
this
morning.
G
Two
different
buckets,
I
think
I
I'd
like
you,
know
a
deeper
dive
into
the
into
the
broader
surveillance
issues
that
we
haven't
addressed
this
morning
and
in
terms
of
the
broader
population.
I
know
it's
been
a
very
good
conversation
about
the
school
situation,
but
that's
my
that's
my
two
pennies
at
the
moment.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate.
A
One
is
directly
dealing
with
bps
and
its
transfer
of
information,
and
the
other
is
overall
surveillance
technology
and
having
to
present
that
to
the
council
having
to
present
that,
basically
to
the
public,
what
we
invest
in
and
how
we
are
watched
in
all
forms
and
making
sure
there's
a
process
to
be
totally
completely
transparent
and
accountable
to
the
public.
I
want
to
be
clear.
None
of
from
and
the
co-sponsors
can
correct
me.
A
This
legislation
does
not
ban
surveillance
so
much
as
it
requires
that
we
are
transparent
about
how
we
are
watching
everybody
and
who
we
pass
information
to
so
so
so
that
folks
are
concerned.
I
know
some
people
are
concerned
about
like
oh,
this
practically
does
this,
or
does
this.
There
is
no
ban,
because
we-
and
I
say
this-
is
a
supporter
of
this
legislation,
but
as
a
council
and
as
I
understand,
surveillance
may
be
necessary.
A
Sometimes
I
just
want-
and
I
think
many
people
do
want-
a
process
for
which
we
are
completely
transparent
to
the
folks
of
boston,
about
how
that
transfer,
how
that
surveillance
works,
how
much
we
invest
in
it,
who
is
doing
it
and
where
the
information
goes
so
just
wanted
to.
Thank
you,
councillor,
braden
counselor,
isabey,
george
and
council
box.
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
everyone
who's
here
with
us
today.
I
am.
I
think
this
is
probably
an
ex,
maybe
a
little
bit
of
an
extension
on
council
braden's
questions,
but
what
departments
and
applications
would
this
ordinance
cover?
Because
you
know
we
have
talked
a
lot
about
the
boston
public
schools.
Certainly
the
boston
public,
the
boston
police
department.
Are
there
other
departments
that
would
be
directly
related
to
to
this
ordinance
or
need
to
be
responsible
to
this
ordinance.
H
A
H
H
So
what
what
is
so
I'm
curious-
and
maybe
I
missed
it
in
opening
remarks,
but
the
boston
public
library
is
here
for
example.
What
is
the
impact
on
bpl?
Is
that
cameras
that
are
in
our
libraries
is
that
sharing
information
about
who
has
a
library
card
and
and
what
books
they're
taking
out?
I
want
to
understand
sort
of
the
fuller
impact
of
this
ordinance
on
all
departments.
You
know
I've
spent
some
time
in
feeds
on
the
schools
piece
in
particular,
but
not
so
much
in
some
of
these
other
areas.
H
A
David,
thank
you.
Counselor
george,
the
each
of
the
departments
had
initially
spoke
to
how
the
practical
implication
of
this
ordinance
would
impact
their
the
way
they
their
their
day-to-day
and
if
they,
basically
it
impacts
them.
If
they're
surveying
people
it
doesn't
require
surveillance,
it
doesn't
reduce
their
surveillance.
I
would
say
I
overspoke
a
little
bit
when
it
comes
to
bps.
A
But
that's
that
that's
the
goal
of
this
overall
ordinance
is
is
is
not
to
add
any
additional.
It's
to
say,
everyone
come
forward
with
what
you're
watching
and
it
would
take
a
lot
of
time
and
so
that
the
as
they
testified
for
many
of
them,
it
would
impact
their
some
of
their
deadlines
for
rfps
some
of
the
their
day-to-day
impacts
on
the
time
it
would
take.
Do
it
mention
it
doesn't,
have
currently
the
technology
right
now
and
it
would
require
a
build
out.
A
H
H
This
is
that
there
are
a
lot
of
unknowns,
but
identifying
them
and
appreciating
sort
of
the
unintended
consequences
while
drafting
this
and
sort
of
working
towards
a
a
solid
ordinance
that
would
withstand
sort
of
the
challenges
of
those
unintended
consequences
and
still
live
in
the
spirit
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
here.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank.
A
I
I
I
think
I
think
counselor
sabi
george
just
raised
a
bunch
of
the
you
know,
potential
implications
for
our
departments,
and
we
heard
that
from
the
administration
at
the
beginning
here
and-
and
I
I'm
I
you
know,
agree
with
kade
that
I'm
both
encouraged
to
hear
from
nayeli
about
the
work
that
the
administration
is
doing
internally
and
also
feel
like.
You
know
it's
time
to
unite
those
conversations,
and
I
I
find
that
for
me
looking
at
this
legislation,
you
know
I.
I
Legislation
harmonious
with
these
different
concerns
and
as
somebody
who
is
formerly
in
the
housing
authority,
I'm
very
sensitive
to
the
rfp
dynamics
and
the
fact
that,
like
rfping,
is
how
we
do
a
lot
of
work
in
the
city,
and
we
can't
have
a
piece
of
legislation
that
doesn't
that
doesn't
contemplate
that
and
think
about
to
chifa's
goods.
Question
you
know
are
we?
Is
it
something
where
the
council's
evaluating
things
before
rfps
even
go
out,
in
which
case
we're
sort
of
pre-deciding?
I
What
kind
of
technologies
can
bid
or
are
we
doing
it
after
and
then
how
do
we
work
that
with
kind
of
the
regulations
around
accepting
a
bid?
But
these
all
seem
to
me
like
soluble
problems,
and
I
think
the
thing
that
I
would
say
to
the
administration
is.
I
appreciate
everybody's
coming
and
saying
that
they
agree
with
the
spirit
of
the
legislation.
I
I
think
that
we
need
to
move
to
the
next
step
where
we
say
like
yes,
we're
doing.
Legislation
like
this
is
a.
This
is
a
thing
that's
happening,
and
so
you
know
to
counselor
woo
and
arroyo's
point
like
but
like.
Let's
like,
let's
have
a
markup,
let's
sit
down
and
hash
out
the
departmental
implications.
I
Let's
you
know
come
to
something
that
is
going
to
be
workable
for
our
departments,
but
you
know
in
the
sort
of
like
this
is
a
silly
analogy
in
my
head,
but
you
know
in
the
world
of
improv
part
of
making.
The
thing
work
is
to
say
yes
at
the
outset,
to
the
concept-
and
I
guess
I'm
asking
the
administration
to
say
yes
to
the
concept
of
not
just
the
values
here,
but
the
concept
that
we
are
going
to
be
legislatively
involved
as
a
council.
I
Because
of
that
democratic
accountability,
piece
and
I-
and
so
I
would.
I
would
really
like
us
to
be
looking
when
we
are
next
talking
about
this
and
soon
at
you
know
a
markup
of
the
legislation
at
things
like
you
know
what
what
the
administration
can
share
about
the
internal
review
that
it's
been
doing
and
the
principles
that
drive
that
and
kind
of
really
getting
down
to
brass
tax
here,
because
to
me,
we've
got
to
do
this
legislation,
but
I
also
I
would
acknowledge
it's
a
the
city's
very
bureaucratically
complex.
I
So
that's
sort
of
my
headspace
on
this
and
I'm
really
grateful
to
everybody.
Who's.
Come
today
and
to
the
advocates,
who've
done
so
much
work,
drafting,
and
also
with
the
substantive
amendment
proposals
and
to
the
administration
folks
for
for
showing
up
and
giving
the
departmental
perspectives
today,
and
I
think
it's
just
kind
of
taking
those
to
the
next
level
of
where
does
that
cash
out
language-wise.
So
definitely
here
for
that
conversation
and
sorry
that
I
won't
be
here
for
the
rest
of
this
conversation
today.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Obviously,
thanks
to
the
administration
officials
who
are
here,
my
colleagues,
of
course,
the
advocates
for
the
great
work
and
also
for
you,
madam
chair,
for
this
working
session
and
to
to
echo
many
of
the
settlements
of
others.
As
a
body.
We
certainly
want
members
of
the
public
to
have
a
clear
understanding
of
how
their
information
is
is
being
collected
and
shared,
specifically
referring
to
the
proposed
amendments
about
the
sections
that
are
relevant
to
the
bps
school
police
offices,
school
resource
offices,
etc.
J
We
all
agree
that
students
in
our
classroom
should
be
able
to
be
children
and
that
our
school
leaders
and
teachers
should
play
a
role
in
disciplinary
actions
and
reports
wherever
appropriate.
That
said,
obviously,
I
still
have
a
number
of
questions
similar
to
our
colleague,
council
braden
and
her
reference
in
terms
of
unpacking
this.
But
you
know
I've
heard
about
some
implications
with
respect
to
the
rfp
process,
so
I'd
love
to
have
the
administration,
maybe
speak
more
to
the
implications
budget.
Wise
and
you
know.
J
Obviously
I
put
my
sort
of
fiduciary
responsibility
hat
on
and
we
only
have
a
couple
weeks
left
in
the
legislative
session
and
thinking
about
the
potential
budget
impacts.
It
will
have
on
a
variety
of
different
departments,
many
of
whom
are
represented
here
by
their
respective
department
heads.
So
I
think
it's
sufficient
to
say
that
you
know
we
need
to
really
have
an
understanding
of
what
these
implications
are
for
the
for
the
rfb
process
and
what,
if
any
burdens
will
be
placed?
J
Budgetary
burdens
will
be
placed
on
these
departments
with
respect
to
sort
of
their
day-to-day
operational
impact.
So
I'd
love
to
have
something
on
that
front
and
then
just
maybe
more
from
a
housekeeping
standpoint.
What
if
any
action
is
to
be
taken
now,
and
is
this
something
that
is
going
to
require
in
either
another
working
session
or
more
meetings
of
the
minds
in
the
first
quarter
of
2021
just
for
planning
purposes
through
the
chair.
A
Thank
you
so,
in
terms
of
planning
I'll
just
be
transparent,
I'm
going
to
speak
to
the
co-sponsors
of
this
legislation
as
well
as
advocates,
and
hopefully
the
administration
is
open
to
figuring
out
if
there's
a
way
to
land
this
plane
this
year,
and
if
not,
I
really
would
like
some
firm
indication
from
the
administration
what
their,
if
there's
a
yes
in
there
and
how
long
it's
going
to
take
them
to
fill
in
those
details.
If
we're
going
to
push
this
to
next
year.
A
But
it's
it's
really
the
administration's
kind
of
push
to
say
it's
a
yes,
but
within
x
amount
of
time-
and
yes,
there's
a
commitment
for
us
to
put
the
work
in
to
get
to
that.
So
I
want
to
be
clear
with
that
and
and
also
the
co-sponsors
and
the
and
the
advocates,
because
I
don't
want
to
ignore
the
work
that
they
did,
which
was
a
lot
and
extensive
over
some
time,
and
this
isn't
the
first
time
we've
had
a
surveillance,
ordinance
or
hearing
about
it.
A
So
there's
been
conversation
going
on
to
say
that
we
want
more
conversation
is
nice,
but
I
I
I
need
a
commitment
that
there's
going
to
be
a
landing
of
this
plane
in
terms
of
the
question
about
the
rfp.
I
don't
I
think
it
was.
It
was
chris
that
brought
it
up
or
I
think
it
may
have
been
actually
nailing.
A
L
Sure,
thanks
chair
I'll
just
I'll
just
say
something
quickly,
which
is
that
the
ordinance
as
written
would
allow
for
the
city
to
put
out
rfps
without
coming
to
the
council.
First,
it
would
merely
require
that
before
the
city
enters
into
any
arrangement
to
acquire
a
surveillance
technology
that
the
city
does
not
already
use
that
hasn't
been
previously
approved
that
the
the
technology
be
approved
by
the
council.
L
So
I
I
think,
maybe
an
example
of
why
this
is
important
would
would
benefit
the
public
as
well
as
the
counselors
and
the
folks
in
the
administration
who
are
listening
to
this.
Some
years
back,
the
boston
police
department
put
out
an
rfp
for
a
1.4
million
dollar
social
media
surveillance
system.
They
wanted
a
bespoke
almost
like
military
style,
social
media
tracking
technology
that
they
wanted
to
pay
a
defense
contractor
over
a
million
dollars
to
build.
L
This
became
a
subject
of
a
lot
of
controversy
after
a
boston
herald
reporter
discovered
the
rfp
on
the
city's
contracting
website
and
advocates
then
made
quite
a
bit
of
hay
about
it
at
the
city,
council
and
some
of
the
counselors
who
are
here
now
were
there.
Thankfully,
speaking
out
against
against
this
plan,
it
was
later
shelved
by
the
boston
police
department
because
of
all
the
community
outrage
and
and
outrage
on
the
council.
So
I
think
that's
a
really
important
example
of
why
we
need
an
ordinance
like
this.
L
We
should
have
a
process
in
that
objects,
these
these
types
of
surveillance,
technologies,
the
acquisition
of
these
types
of
surveillance,
technologies,
to
counsel
approval
and
public
debate,
and
not
just
kind
of
rely
on
the
ad
hoc.
You
know
potential
discovery
of
such
an
rfp
by
a
journalist
which
is
what
happened
in
that
case.
So
you
know
if
the
city
has
specific
language
that
that
you'd
like
to
suggest
that
you
think
could
make
that
that
clearer.
You
know
we
would
love
to
take
a
look
at
that
again.
L
I
just
want
to
say
that
it's,
it's
really
disappointing
from
the
advocates
perspective
that
we've
been
working
on
this
for
for
many
months
years,
even
with
folks
on
the
council,
and
that
it's
only
really
at
the
last
minute
that
the
administration
has
showed
up
to
to
raise
these
concerns
about
the
language.
So
you
know,
I
hope
that
you
can
understand
our
frustration
on
that
point,
and
so
as
much
clarity
as
you
can
provide
is
really
going
to
be
useful.
I
think
for
us
to
move
forward.
S
Thank
you.
I
think
that
chief
oscar
probably
can
speak
more
to
his
department's
rfp
process
and
procurement
obstacles
that
he
thinks
that
the
ordinance
is
likely
to
pose.
From
my
perspective,
I
don't
disagree
with
what
kate
is
saying
about
how
there
are
ways
to
overcome
some
of
the
challenges
that
we've
outlined.
I
I
think
we
were
more
focused
on
kind
of
like
operations
as
they
currently
exist
and
the
challenges
that
we
think
this
is
composed
to
projects
that
are
already
underway
and
rfps
that
are
potentially
already
underway.
S
I
would
agree
with
councillor
bach
that
those
aren't
necessarily
unsolvable
issues,
we're,
I
think.
From
my
perspective
at
least,
I
am
not
speaking
to
the
bps
bpd
context
as
much
as
the
other
departments
that
I
work
with
on
existing
small
scale,
pilots
and
experiments
and
just
wanting
to
work
through
what
those
new
processes
would
look
like
in
the
context
of
this
ordinance
but
I'll.
Let
chief
osgood
speak
to
the
rfp
and
procurement
process
because
he's
more
familiar
with
it
from
a
departmental
standpoint,.
P
Just
really
quickly,
first,
on
the
specific
question:
the
council,
clarity
that
you
raised,
I,
I
don't
think
it
is
inherent
that
this
would
necessarily
have
a
budget
impact
on
it.
May
it
might
impact
sort
of
the
pool
of
responses
and
things
like
that,
but
I
don't
think
we
necessarily
have
a
question
impact.
I
do
think
that
it
is
useful
thinking
of
section
four.
I
think
section
four
sort
of
considers
all
the
principal
ways
that
we
would
partner
or
acquire
sort
of
data
or
technology,
whether
that
is
it's,
it's
donated.
P
It
is
a
through
a
partnership,
a
research
partnership
or
whether
it's
procured,
I
just
think,
there's
some
work.
We
need
to
do
to
make
sure
that
the
way
it
is
specifically
outlined
in
section
four
is
aligns
with
both
the
processes
that
we
have
that
have
been
effective
for
us
and
upholds
the
sort
of
the
the
transparency
and
accountability
that
is
sort
of
the
intent
of
this.
K
K
It
doesn't
move
fast
enough
for
the
chinese
that
we
need
to
move
things,
and
so
I
think
that
you
know
it
leaves
always
a
bad
taste
in
people's
mouths,
because
it
doesn't
really
seem
that
whether
you,
like
the
spirit
of
when
of
which
things
are
written
in
the
spirit,
is
great,
but
the
the
intent
versus
impact
is
what
I
think
that
our
people
at
this.
You
know
this
point
needs.
So
I'm
going
to
ask
a
question
that
I
got
from
on
instagram.
K
So
basically
I'll
just
read.
It
here
says
that
they're
disappointed
at
last
week's
meeting
about
bps
that
they
didn't
have
the
statistics
of
enrollees,
and
the
question
for
today
is
how
many
active
gang
members
does
bpd
regularly
come
in
contact
with
and
how
many
active
gangs
with
conflict
are
there
right
now
in
the
city
of
boston?
So
that's
one
question
and
then
I'm
just
a
little
bit
confused
about
the
language
that
we're
using
in
this
ordinance.
K
You
know,
I
think
that
the
language
is
confusing,
because
it
says
that
it
doesn't
qualify
as
surveillance
data,
but
yet
we're
still
coloring
surveillance
data
so
which
is
it?
I
also
think
that
most
people
don't
fully
understand
what's
going
on
when
they
give
the
the
city
their
information
like.
If
I
go
to
the
parking
clerk-
and
I
give
my
social
security
number,
I
don't
think
it's
giving.
My
social
security
is
saying
that
we're
giving
it
to
the
entire
city.
K
Are
these
inter
attorneys
pro
bono,
who
is
footing
the
bill
who's
paying
for
these
lawyers?
A
lot
of
families
may
not
be
able
to
afford
attorney
fees
for
meetings
like
this,
so
I'm
just
curious
about
what
how
we
supporting
families
and
then
I'm
also
curious
in
terms
of
the
language
and
and
interpretation
as
to
whether
or
not
people
know
what
they,
what
information
is
being
offered
to
them
and
then,
just
as
a
general
note,
we've
seen
these
kind
of
reforms
take
place
all
across
the
country,
including
seattle.
As
kate
pointed
out.
K
We
also
heard
testimonies
from
the
administration
that
many
of
these
changes
are
being
made
here
and
already
are
being
undertaken
and
I
think
we're
more
aligned
on
the
issues
than
we
think,
and
I
think
that
these
moments
require
us
to
lean
in
and
move
the
work
forward.
And
the
question
is
where's.
The
political
will
to
make
that
happen.
A
Thank
you
so
much.
Maybe
we
can
have
for
the
the
scriveners
of
the
ordinance
that
either
the
co-sponsors
or
the
advocates
specifically
asked
answer
the
questions
about
the
attorneys
around
specific
languages.
The
language
excuse
me
that
counsel
me
had
outright
just
questions
about,
and
then
I
think
the
admission
administration
has
heard
from
all
of
us
our
frustration
about
this
kind
of
late
late
conversation.
T
C
V
Essentially,
these
lists
are
serving
to
predict
the
likability
that
or
possibility
that
a
young
person
will
become
a
criminal,
and
so
they
have
all
these
identifiers.
I
mean
not
too
different
right
from
how
we
have
the
ten
point.
Gang
data
gang
base
points
system,
so
they
essentially
keep
this
list
of
of
young
people
who
they
think
in
the
future
will
become
criminals,
and
so
it's
already
like
predicting
right
from
a
young
age,
and
so
for
us.
I
think
the
spirit
of
the
ordinance
is
very
much
preventative.
V
It's
very
much.
You
know
recognizing
that
we
already
have
such
a
difficult
and
burdensome
criminal
justice
system.
That
already
is
so
discriminatory
and
so
broken
in
many
ways
our
hope
was
to
create
a
ordinance
that
already
starts
to
deal
with
some
of
the
root
causes,
which
usually
starts
with
the
criminalization
of
young
people,
who
then
become
older
civilians
in
our
everyday
society.
V
Right
now,
that's
not
to
say
that
we
shouldn't
have
obviously
a
broader
conversation
about
surveillance
at
large,
and
I
think
a
lot
of
the
other
advocates
will
have
a
lot
to
say
about
that.
But
I
just
wanted
to
offer
that
framing
about
how
this
is
in
many
ways,
preventative
and
then
also
to
city
council
mejia's
point
earlier
regarding
the
pro
bono,
whether
it's
lawyers
with
a
proponent
or
not.
V
V
T
You,
oh
thank
you
mom
chair.
Are
you
seeing
my
page?
My
sharing?
Yes
great?
Thank
you
mom
chairs,
so
I'm
I'm
just
going
to
build
up
on
what
cade
malaria
were
saying,
especially
some
of
the
concerns
raised
by
councillors,
isabey
george
george,
so
at
first
we
have
to.
I
think
that
it
makes
sense
to
like
read
the
definition
of
the
ordinance,
because
there
are
some
exceptions
that
I
want
to
go
through.
T
So
in
section
what
was
what
used
to
be
section
two
now,
it's
section
1673
by
there
is
a
and
a
specific
provision
that
would,
for
example,
exempt
most
of
the
data
collected
by
the
libraries,
because
it
says
that
the
following
do
not
constitute
surveillance
data
and
the
requirements
of
this
ordinance
do
not
apply
to
them.
So
a
is
surveillance
data
acquired
where
the
individual,
knowingly
and
voluntarily
consented
to
provide
information,
such
as
submitting
personal
information
for
the
receipt
of
city
services.
T
So
in
this
case,
if
someone
goes
to
the
library
and
wants
to
get
a
library
card,
that
would
be
a
city
service.
So
so
this
doesn't
mean
that
the
data
is
not
protected
right.
The
data
is
protected
because
the
the
city
has
to
take
us
to
certain
obligations
in
accordance
with
the
terms
of
services
and
the
privacy
policies
that
the
library
has
with
the
people
and
then
finally
surveillance
data
acquired
where
the
individual
was
presented,
with
a
clear
and
conspicuous
opportunity
to
opt
out
of
providing
information.
T
And
finally,
I
would
also
want
to
mention
the
following,
which
is
sorry
it's
the
section
four,
which
is
about
the
rfp.
Well,
actually,
the
city
may
seek
here,
as
you
can
see,
make
sick,
but
not
accept
funds
for
surveillance
technology
without
approval
from
the
city
council.
So
so
this
came
up
when
we
were
working
in
summerville,
because
the
police
department
there
raised
the
question
that
they
sometimes
need
to
present
or
seek
funds
with
anticipation
in
a
manner
that
cannot
be
coordinated
with
a
city
council.
T
So
that's
why
we
introduced
this
and,
as
kate
was
mentioning,
this
means
that
it's
not
that
they
can
all
the
whole
rf
rfp
process
will
be
trumped
by
this
ordinance.
It's
just
by
the
acquisition
using
or
entering
into
the
agreement
to
acquire,
share
or
otherworldly
otherwise
use
anything
outside.
Is
the
administration
can't
do
it
with
another
prophecy
council,
it's
just
the
use
and
the
engaging
with
the
supreme
technology
that
is
being
targeted
by
this
ordinance.
Thank
you.
Mama.
T
A
Sorry,
thank
you
very
much,
so
I
think
we've
gone
through
the
counselors
each
having
their
opportunity
to
ask
any
questions
or
to
point
this.
I've
indicated
where
I'd
like
this
conversation
to
go
in
the
next
couple
days.
If
at
anything
a
genuine,
you
know,
attempt
and
demonstration
from
the
administration
they
want.
A
But
if
this
is,
if
this
is
not
there,
then
then
it
makes
us
inclined
to
think
that
we're
going
to
have
to
do
this
without
the
administration.
That's
not
that's
not
that!
That's
not
ideal!
It's
not
the
goal,
so
I'm!
Otherwise.
Unless
there's
anyone
who
has
any
burning
concluding
remarks
from
any
party,
you
can
raise
your
blue
hand
at
this
time
to
speak,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
close
out.
This
working
session
follow
up
with
the
co-sponsors
and
the
administration.
K
Madam
chair,
I'm
sorry
I
didn't
get
my
questions
were
not.
I
had
one
more
question
and
some
of
my
questions
were
in
response
to
council
breeding
and
council
sabi
george,
but
there
was
a
very
specific
question
that
I
asked
that
did
not
get
addressed,
so
I
just
want
to
flag
that
if
that's
okay,
madam
chair.
A
K
One
I
also
was
curious
about
the
question
that
I
had
is
also
about
the
gang
database
in
terms
of
how
we're
tracking
and
how
many
people
we
have.
I
just
I'm
curious
that
there's
that
and
in
regards
to
the
lawyers,
I
know
that
there
was
some
reference
made
about
the
attempt
that
is
made.
I
I
don't
think
that
nonprofit
organizations
should
continue
to
bear
the
brunt
of
the
financial
hardships
that
exist
for
people
to
be
able
to
advocate
for
themselves.
K
Y
Was
fine,
no
councilman,
so
the
the
you
know
we
are
nonprofits,
so
we
don't
charge
people
whom
we
represent,
but
we
also
you
know
at
gbls.
My
project
has
me
and
then
I
have
half
a
paralegal
and
half
another
lawyer.
So
you
know,
of
course,
like
the
number
of
cases
we
can
take
is
limited
and
although
we
do
think
it's
really
important
to
connect
folks
with
legal
resources.
I
also
think
like
the
attempt
of
the
policy
is
to
if
someone
needs
a
lawyer
like
the
harm,
has
already
happened.
So
we
also
try
really.
K
Thank
you
yeah,
so
I
guess
I
so
that's
so
that
I'm
fur
so
I'm
more
clear
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at
is.
We
should
not
be
burdening
already
overburdened
nonprofit
organizations
and
and
with
it,
so
they
are
already
feeling
the
financial
crunch
and
you're
right
lawyer
mcintyre
that
we
need
to
prevent
the
harm
from
being
done
to
begin
with
right.
K
I
should
not
be
trying
to
get
the
city
to
spend
any
more
money,
but
you
know
I
just
do
think
that
we
have
a
responsibility
to
also
think
about
how
do
we?
How
do
we
support
organizations
and
families,
especially
when
we're
the
ones
who
are
driving
these
inequities?
So
that's
where
I
was
trying
to
come
from.
A
Counselor
mejia,
that's
an
excellent
question:
it
actually
mirrors
what
we're
doing
already.
We
got
cdbg
money,
we
got
carex
money
and
that
has
helped
to
fund
two
attorneys
at
greater
boston
legal
services
when
it
comes
to
housing.
So
it's
not
unprecedented
because
make
or
direct
funds.
So
I
think
the
issue
for
us,
not
even
the
issue,
but
the
further
research
would
be
what
funding
stream
either
applied
by
the
city
or
a
plot
applied
by
advocates
or
someone
to
support
or
bolster.
E
Deal
look
at
a
chair.
May
I
jump
in
yeah
yeah,
so
thank
you
so
much.
I
want
to
thank
my
colleagues
thank
the
administration,
thank
all
the
panelists
and
I'll
jump
in
on
just
the
last
comments
on
the
non-profits.
I
think
our
non-profits
provide
an
incredible
service
to
our
city
and
we're
much
stronger
because
of
our
non-profit
partners.
As
people
know,
I
spent
the
vast
majority
of
my
career
in
the
nonprofit
life
working
with
many
of
you,
many
of
the
advocates,
and
it's
really
important.
E
While
we
want
to
make
sure
our
nonprofits
are
strong,
particularly
those
who
are
in
the
advocacy
community,
it's
important
that
they
keep
their
their
hands
off
city
money.
So
we
don't
want
city
money
going
to
them
because
we
want
them
to
continue
to
be
strong
advocates
it's
hard
to
bite
the
hand
that
feeds
you
and
so
at
mac.
E
I
would
argue
it
is
not
enough
and
that
we,
it
can
be
stronger
and
now
is
not
the
time
to
say.
Well,
we've
done
it
pat
ourselves
on
the
back
and
walk
away.
Now
is
the
time
that
we
double
down
and
make
sure
we
are
righting
the
wrongs
of
the
history
of
this
nation,
from
mass
incarceration
to
war
on
drugs
and
when
we
know
the
history-
and
we
know
that
boston
is
not
exempt
from
that
history.
E
E
E
We
know
that
from
the
examples
that
attorney
mcintyre
has
already
shared,
that
there
are
several
problems
and
that
the
students
and
the
clients
that
she
represents
would
still
be
caught
up
in
some
court
or
some
sort
of
drama
based
on
the
the
new
proposal
that
was
already
passed
by
the
school
committee.
So
it
does
not
go
far
enough.
E
My
hope
is
that
we
will
in
fact
make
sure
that
if
we
say
that
we
believe
in
the
spirit
and
the
intent
and
the
values
that
we
are
going
to
move
forward,
there
are
nine
days
left
before
the
legislative
cycle
of
the
boston.
The
boston
city
council
ends,
and
two
of
those
days
are
saturday
and
sunday.
Okay.
So
there
are
seven
work
days
left.
E
If
we're
going
to
get
this
done,
I
would
really
appreciate
a
marked
up
version
from
the
administration
saying
what
their
concerns
are,
what
their
questions
are,
what
their
suggested
language
would
be.
We
have
that
from
the
advocates
we
have
that
from
the
advocates.
We
have
language
that
we
have
been
working
on
and
we're
ready
to
move
forward.
E
As
our
chairwoman
has
already
said,
it
is
not
my
goal
ever
to
jam,
something
in.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
moving
forward
legislation
that
is
thoughtful
and
that
everyone
has
had
the
chance
to
weigh
in
and
get
their
thoughts
down
on
actual
paper.
So
that
is
what
I
am
asking
the
administration
to
do
to
put
it
on
paper
so
that
we
can
move
forward.
E
The
city
council
is
prepared
to
move
forward
with
a
vote,
and
I
don't
I'm
gonna
follow
the
lead
of
our
chair
and
the
the
advocates
and
my
colleagues
who
have
sponsored
this
with
me
to
see
when
that
timing
is,
but
I'm
very
mindful
that
we
don't
have
much
left
in
this
legislative
cycle
and
that
the
the
sense
of
urgency
is
here.
This
is
not
we've
already
done
it,
so,
let's
just
see
what
happens
or
you
know,
let's
just
push
and
kick
the
can
down
the
road.
E
D
D
On
top
of
that,
the
reality
is-
and
we
have
a
hearing
on
this-
that
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
be
held
this
year.
But
the
gang
database
is
is
racist.
I
mean
it's
discriminatory.
It
does
fios
based
on
clothing.
On
association,
whether
I
mean
you
can
end
up
on
the
gang
database
without
ever
having
been
seen
committing
any
criminal
act
that
you
can,
you
can
be
an
alleged
gang
member
and
confirmed,
and
frankly
I
have
an
issue
with
bpd
having
that
process.
D
You
know,
I
think,
there's
again,
I
stand
by
this
language.
I
stand
by
the
protections
here
and
I
look
forward
to
seeing
where
the
administration's
problems
with
these
link,
this
language
is
and
where
they
think
this
doesn't
go
further
enough,
because,
frankly,
for
me,
it's
incredibly
troubling
that
what
I've
heard
hasn't
been
here's
how
we
protect
more
people,
here's
how
we
make
this
more
protective
everything
I've
heard
is:
let's
not
protect
them,
that
much,
let's
lessen
the
language
here
that
might
create
more
paperwork
for
us.
D
We
might
have
to
disclose
more
things,
and
that,
for
me,
doesn't
cut
it
just
doesn't
cut
it
right.
Like
that's,
that's
incredibly
problematic,
I
haven't
heard
a
single
solution.
Now
one
person
from
the
administration
has
said
a
single
thing.
That
said
this
is
how
we
can
actually
protect
more
people,
even
in
defense
of
the
bps
policy.
It's
not
that
this
protects
more
people,
it's
that
this
is
what
we've
already
done
and
we
would
like
to
not
go
further
and
that's
a
problem
for
me.
D
I'm
just
gonna
put
that
right
there,
especially
considering
that
you've
all
missed
hearings
and
those
things
add
up,
and
then
you
end
up
here
making
these
kinds
of
arguments.
And,
frankly
you
know
I'm
gotten
to
a
point.
Now.
I've
only
been
here
for
less
than
a
year.
I
will
call
the
administration
out
repeatedly
when
they
continue
to
miss
hearings
and
show
up
to
ordinances
and
then
make
that
a
hearing
it
holds
us
up.
We
got
seven
days
to
do
the
work.
I
look
forward
to
getting
this
passed.
D
N
Madam
chief,
I
could
briefly
respond
just
real
quick.
Our
policy
is
very
clear
that
we
do
not
allow
any
reference
to
suspected
or
less
gang
involvement,
affiliation
association
of
membership,
so
we
already
made
that
prohibition,
and
that
does
not
happen.
It's
clearly
stated
in
our
policy
and
as
I've
mentioned
right
the
beginning
of
this
conversation,
we
we
acknowledge
that
we
did
not
reach
a
full
consensus
with
all
the
parties
that
we
work
with
above
and
beyond
the
group.
N
That's
here
around
our
policy,
that's
why
we
agreed
to
create
a
working
group
to
continue
to
monitor
and
provide
updates,
so
by
no
stretch
of
the
imagination,
we're
saying
we're
done
here,
but
we
just
want
to
make
sure
we
continue
the
conversation
and
work
appropriately.
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
you
know.
Council
royals
comments
are
very
inaccurate.
Our
policy
does
not
allow
for
the
sharing
of
suspected
or
alleged
gang
involvement.
A
And
accuracy,
no,
no!
No!
No!
No!
No!
No!
This
is
what
I
exactly
wanted
to
avoid
chief
depena,
I
I
don't
appreciate
the
characterization
of
anyone's
comments
today
being
inaccurate
again,
as
stated
before,
this
conversation
could
have
happened
before
and
there
could
have
been
a
back
and
forth.
So
we're
not
going
to
have
this
back
and
forth
over
accuracies
or
not
of
the
co-sponsors
of
this
particular
ordinance
is
what
is
the
subject
today
and
how
this
or
does
it
work.
A
I
just
really
I'm
I'm
trying
to
land
this
plane
as
an
in
this
working
session,
so
we
can
get
to
additional
things
that
this
counselor
is
trying
to
pass
in
the
as
the
limited
time
that
counselor
janie
has
mentioned.
So
at
this
point
at
this
point-
and
I
apologize
counselor
going
to
cut
you
off,
but
I
I
do
want
if
there's
anybody
else
and
counselor
role,
you
can
have
the
last
word,
but
I
mean
I
really
want
that
to
be
the
last.
It
will
be
very
short
one.
E
A
A
B
He
speaks
madam
chair,
I'm
sorry,
my
camera's
not
working,
so
if
I
may
I'll
keep
it
very,
very
short,
just
to
say
so
much
of
what
I've
heard
today
really
reflects
the
fact
that
or
the
assertion
that
this
work
is
already
being
done,
and
I
just
wanted
to
appreciate
that
and
thank
everyone
for
their
work
and
then
continue
to
push
on
the
need
for
transparency
right.
So,
even
if
that
work
is
happening,
we
need
to
be
sure
that
it
is
happening.
B
B
D
I
could
make
it
very
brief.
Thank
you
to
be
clear
what
the
bps
policy
allows
is
for
the
inclusion
of
what
they
call
confirmed.
Gang
affiliation,
confirmed
gang
affiliation
would
still
require
communication
with
bpd
to
figure
out
if
somebody's
on
a
gang
database.
Unless
again
bps
has
a
gang
database.
We
can
parse
language
as
to
whether
they're
suspected
or
affiliated
here's
the
deal.
You
can
end
up
as
a
confirmed
gang
member
by
doing
zero
criminal
activity
simply
by
what
you
are
wearing
and
who
you
are
associating
with.
D
It
does
not
make
you
a
confirmed
gang
member.
It
still
makes
you
an
alleged
gang
member,
and
so
whether
or
not
you
have
an
issue
with
the
language
that
I
am
saying
about
a
confirmed
or
a
suspicious
or
an
allegation
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
language
that
the
bps
policy
allows
for
is
confirmed
gang
member,
I
don't
know
how
they
would
get
that
information
without
communicating
first
with
bpd
about
a
student
about
that
student's
name
about
that
student's
access
and
then
just
so
we're
clear
on
what
confirmation
means.
D
Confirmation
could
mean
that
they
have
been
seen
in
the
company
or
the
vicinity
of
people
who
are
also
allegedly
gang
members,
that
they
have
been
wearing
clothing
like
a
cleveland,
indians
hat
or
whatever
it
may
be.
That
gives
them
points
on
a
system
that
then
makes
them
a
confirmed
gang
member,
and
so,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you
know
that
that
the
parsing
of
language
here
doesn't
really
matter
to
me.
D
At
the
end
of
the
day,
what
bps's
policy
allows
for
is
the
inclusion
of
somebody's
confirmed
gang
affiliation,
which
is
based
on
very
soft
observations
that
is
based
on
very
problematic
racist
observations,
and
so,
when
we
talk
about
the
criminalization
of
our
children,
it's
precisely
that
that
I
mean,
and
so
when
we
talk
about
whether
or
not
I'm
being
inaccurate
or
accurate.
Everything
I
just
said
is
accurate
and
whether
or
not
bps
is
willing
to
say
today
that
they
do
not
have
to
speak
to
bpd
about
a
student
in
advance
to
figure
out.
D
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
this.
This
is
this.
The
goal
was
a
working
session.
I
think
we
had
a
robust
hearing
in
the
end,
and
so
we
have
several
different
points
and
perspectives.
We
will
get
to
work.
I
look
forward
to
hearing
from
the
administration.
Thank
you,
the
co-sponsors.
Thank
you.
The
advocates
have
a
good
day.