HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2301-0741Item No. 2301-0741 Page 1 of 8
1
4
1
7
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Police
Meeting Date: April 3, 2023
Report #: 2301-0741
TITLE
Approval of the following: 1) Contract with Flock Safety (S23187316) for Automated License
Plate Recognition (ALPR) Implementation for a three-year term in an amount not to exceed
$174,400; 2) ALPR Surveillance Use Policy; and 3) Budget amendment in the Supplemental Law
Enforcement Services fund; CEQA status – categorically exempt (Section 15321 enforcement
actions);
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that the City Council:
1. Approve Contract No. S23187316 (Attachment A) with Flock Safety, for 3 years, not to
exceed $174,400 to implement fixed Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR)
technology; and
2. Approve the fixed Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) surveillance use policy
and use of ALPR technology to deter and investigate criminal activity (Attachment B);
and
3. Amend the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Appropriation (requires 2/3 approval) for the
Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) by
a. Increasing SLESF Contract Services expense appropriation by $61,900, and
b. Decreasing the ending fund balance by $61,900.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report contains a surveillance evaluation of Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR),
as required by municipal ordinance, describing the uses and benefits of fixed ALPR technology,
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 2 of 8
1
4
1
7
associated privacy considerations and applicable law. Staff is recommending Council approve a
three-year contract for the installation of fixed ALPR cameras at strategic locations in the City,
as well as an ALPR surveillance use policy. ALPR technology uses a combination of cameras and
computer software to scan the license plates of passing vehicles. The use of ALPR technology
provides several potential benefits, including crime deterrence, real-time alerts to police when
stolen or wanted vehicles enter an area, and enhanced investigative capabilities when a crime
has already occurred. The initial year is recommended to be funded from COPS grant funds.
BACKGROUND
The City Council discussed the prospective use of fixed ALPR technology on October 24, 20221.
This staff report brings forward a contract with Flock Safety for the deployment of fixed ALPR,
as well as the associated Surveillance Use Policy.
Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology uses a combination of cameras and
computer software to scan the license plates of passing vehicles. The cameras, which can be
fixed (e.g., mounted on road signs or traffic lights) or mobile (i.e., mounted on a vehicle),
capture computer-readable images that allow law enforcement to compare plate numbers
against plates of known stolen vehicles or vehicles associated with individuals wanted on
criminal charges. When a match is found, a real-time alert is generated, notifying police of the
location where the image of the stolen or wanted vehicle was captured. ALPR data can also be
used by investigators, after a crime has been committed, to identify and locate associated
vehicles.
The Palo Alto Police Department has utilized a single mobile ALPR unit for over ten years. The
limitation of a single mobile ALPR is that alerts and data collection only occur when that vehicle
is being operated by an officer and data is also limited to the route and distance traveled by the
patrol vehicle.
ANALYSIS
The addition of fixed ALPR cameras provides the City with a cost-effective force multiplier that
helps direct officers to where crimes are occurring and provides invaluable investigative leads
following a crime. Fixed ALPR technology is being used widely by many local police agencies to
locate stolen vehicles and solve crimes where a vehicle has been used. Over time, the quality
and accuracy of ALPR technology has continued to evolve, while also becoming more
affordable.
This report recommends the Council approve the following:
•A three-year contract with Flock Safety (S23187316) for ALPR Implementation, and
•Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Surveillance Use Policy and Surveillance
Evaluation
1 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/City-Hall/City-Council/Council-Agendas-Minutes
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 3 of 8
1
4
1
7
•Budget adjustment in the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services fund (grant funding)
to provide for this investment.
Three Year Contract with Flock Safety
The proposed three-year contract calls for Flock Safety to install and maintain twenty ALPR
cameras at locations identified by the Police Department. It also calls for Flock Safety to
provide the Department with searchable access to its ALPR data, and to store the data for 30
days.
Staff proposes a follow-on contract procurement process as permitted under Palo Alto
Municipal Code section 2.30.360(k), allowing the use of another governmental agency’s
contract or substantially the same contract terms and exempting the competitive solicitation
requirements to acquire the fixed ALPR equipment. The contract is based upon the City of
Alameda’s recent procurement process that selected Flock Safety. The City’s Procurement
Officer has determined that the City of Alameda’s solicitation process is substantially similar to
the City’s. City staff reviewed the marketplace for this technology and received uniformly
positive feedback from numerous other local government agencies regarding their experiences
with the quality and reliability of the ALPR systems supplied by Flock Safety. Therefore, staff
recommend moving forward with Flock Safety. Use of the City of Alameda’s contract terms
provides a more timely and efficient deployment of this technology than if the City performed
its own solicitation process.
Automated License Plate Recognition Surveillance Use Policy
Palo Alto’s Surveillance Technology ordinance (No. 5420) modified PAMC §2.30.620, et seq. to
establish criteria and procedures to protect personal privacy in the acquisition and use of
surveillance technology, and provide for ongoing oversight. Fixed ALPR is “surveillance
technology” as defined by the ordinance. The ordinance requires Council approval of the
acquisition of new surveillance technology and of a Surveillance Use Policy for each new
approved technology. In approving new surveillance technology, the Council must determine
that its benefits outweigh the associated costs and concerns.
The ordinance sets forth specific elements that must be present in a Surveillance Use Policy,
including proposed access, use, and retention, as well as a description of compliance
procedures. The Department has prepared and attached a Surveillance Use Policy, which
addresses each of these elements (Attachment B).
In addition, prior to the approval by the Council of a new surveillance activity, the ordinance
requires the completion of a Surveillance Evaluation, consisting of five specific elements.
Surveillance Evaluation
(1) A description of the surveillance technology, including how it works and what
information it captures;
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 4 of 8
1
4
1
7
A fixed ALPR system captures the date, time, location, license plate (state, partial, paper, and
no plate), and vehicle characteristics (make, model, type, and color) of passing vehicles. ALPR
cameras are positioned to capture rear license plates only and are not designed to capture
images of vehicle occupants or use facial recognition technology. ALPR data is transmitted in an
encrypted format to, and stored by, Flock Safety, consistent with Criminal Justice Information
System (CJIS) protocols. The Department will access the data via a web-based platform.
(2) Information on the proposed purpose, use and benefits of the surveillance
technology;
Purpose & Use: Recent years have seen regional increases in catalytic converter thefts, auto
burglaries, vehicle thefts and organized retail thefts. The community has also experienced
several brazen robberies and residential burglaries. Those responsible for such crimes
commonly use a vehicle to travel to and flee from the crime scene. Moreover, they often
engage in criminal offenses involving multiple jurisdictions, and commonly arrive in a stolen
vehicle, a vehicle bearing stolen plates, or a vehicle that law enforcement has previously
connected to verified criminal activity. Identifying such vehicles, via fixed ALPR, as they enter a
target area provides law enforcement an opportunity to intervene before additional crimes are
committed, and potentially apprehend wanted persons or recover stolen property. ALPR data
also provides investigators with an additional technique to identify and apprehend offenders
once a crime has already occurred.
Other local communities are currently using fixed ALPR technology, including Menlo Park,
Atherton, Los Altos Hills, Saratoga, Campbell, San Jose, Los Gatos, Gilroy, Morgan Hill, Milpitas,
and Santa Clara, with others in the process of implementing the technology. Anecdotally, these
jurisdictions report that since the deployment of fixed ALPR, they have experienced a marked
increase in the recovery of stolen vehicles and report investigative success stories attributable
to ALPR data.
Benefits of Usage: The use of ALPR technology provides several potential benefits:
•Real-Time Alerts: When a real-time ALPR alert occurs, notifying police of the presence of
a wanted or stolen vehicle, officers can respond to the area to search for the vehicle. If
officers locate the vehicle, prior to making an enforcement stop, they visually confirm
the plate number and manually check it against law enforcement databases to confirm
the accuracy of the ALPR information and the legal justification for the stop.
•Deterrence: Even if officers are unable to locate and stop the vehicle in question,
suspects may see the police response and be deterred from further criminal activity.
Indeed the mere presence of the fixed ALPR cameras may act as a deterrent. Police
personnel have reported to staff that some criminals will intentionally target
jurisdictions without ALPR technology and avoid those where it is in use.
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 5 of 8
1
4
1
7
•Solving Crimes Already Committed: Commonly, by the time a crime is reported to police,
the suspects have already fled the area, and it is the job of police to identify and locate
the suspects at a later time. While victims and witnesses can often provide a
description of the vehicle used by a suspect, those descriptions are frequently
incomplete (e.g., a partial license plate number, vehicle type and color only) or consist
of a license plate number that corresponds to a stolen vehicle or a stolen plate.
Investigators can turn that imperfect information into actionable leads by querying the
ALPR database. Existing DMV databases do not offer this capability.
•Regional Coordination: ALPR data sharing among local law enforcement partners allows
agencies to collaboratively investigate, identify and apprehend multi-jurisdictional
offenders, or those who commit crimes in one jurisdiction but reside in another. For
example, in the case of organized retail thieves, ALPR data sharing may allow
investigators to connect multiple cases across disparate jurisdictions, share evidence,
and obtain the best prosecutorial outcomes.
•Expanded Searchable Data Set: Private entities (e.g., shopping centers, individual
retailers) utilizing ALPR cameras can share their data with local law enforcement, to
include real-time alerts. This is a one-way share. In other words, an entity that shares
its ALPR data with law enforcement does not gain access to law enforcement data in
return. The investigative usefulness of an ALPR system is greatly enhanced as its
searchable data set increases, whether from other law enforcement contributors or
private entities.
One of the City Council’s four priorities this calendar year is Community Health and Safety.
While the implementation of ALPR for policing was not previously identified as an objective,
based on prior Council discussion and subject to approval staff will recommend adding this as
an objective. Further, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes policies S-1.6 and S-1.7, which
supports a balanced approach of utilizing safety technology with policy-driven safeguards. The
Department believes that the deployment of a fixed ALPR system, with sound polices and
training, would support crime prevention, criminal apprehension, stolen vehicle recovery, and
criminal investigation.
(3) The location or locations where the surveillance technology may be used;
To derive maximum benefit with the fewest cameras needed, cameras will be placed at
strategically selected locations based on several factors: crime statistics, common vehicular
ingress and egress points, and traffic volume. Accounting for these factors provides the
greatest likelihood of capturing images of suspects’ vehicles and their license plates. While the
Department has no intention of permanently installing ALPR cameras in residential
neighborhoods, cameras could be temporarily repositioned in response to a specific crime in a
specific neighborhood. If placed in a residential neighborhood, cameras would not be
positioned to capture images of homes, front yards, or pedestrians.
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 6 of 8
1
4
1
7
(4) Existing federal, state and local laws and regulations applicable to the surveillance
technology and the information it captures; the potential impacts on civil liberties and privacy;
and proposals to mitigate and manage any impacts;
Some organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), have generally
expressed concerns about the use of ALPR, specifically on the aspects of data access, storage,
retention, sharing, and reporting. The Department’s proposed Surveillance Use Policy is
responsive, in whole or in part, to each of these concerns and the ACLU’s LPR guidelines2. For
example, while many local law enforcement agencies retain ALPR data for one year and often
longer, the Department believes that a retention period of 30 days will adequately support its
investigative needs. Only data which has been identified as relevant to a specific criminal
investigation will be retained longer.
In addition to the City Surveillance Technology Ordinance, California Civil Code §1798.90.5, et
seq. governs the collection of license plate information by government agencies. It spells out
the policies and training that an agency must implement when collecting ALPR data. These
policies, largely, address the same concerns set forth above. The Department will ensure that
its policies and training satisfy the requirements of this statute. Flock Safety has adopted a
usage and privacy policy consistent with California Civil Code §1798.90.5, et seq. Moreover, by
the terms of the proposed contract with the City, Flock Safety is required to observe specific
data security protocols, including restricting data access only to that which is necessary for
system maintenance, logging all access by its employees, conducting quarterly compliance
audits, and permitting the City to review these audits logs.
Internally, data will only be accessible to trained staff with a legitimate law enforcement need,
and all queries will be logged and subject to audit. Whereas some local law enforcement
agencies share data with federal and out of state law enforcement agencies, the Department
will only share its data with other local law enforcement agencies with whom an MOU is in
place, and those queries would likewise be logged. Neither the Department, nor Flock Safety,
will share the Department’s data with any non-law enforcement entities. The Department will
make accessible to the public, via its ALPR webpage3, relevant policies as well as information
concerning the number of cameras deployed, the data retention period, and the names of law
enforcement agencies with whom it shares data. Flock Safety will also maintain a publicly-
accessible Transparency Portal containing much of the same information.
(5) The costs for the surveillance technology, including acquisition, maintenance,
personnel and other costs, and current or potential sources of funding.
2 https://www.aclunc.org/publications/making-smart-decisions-about-surveillance-guide-community-
transparency-accountability
3 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Police/Public-Information-Portal/Automated-License-Plate-
Recognition-ALPR
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 7 of 8
1
4
1
7
In year one, the initial deployment of this ALPR technology would come at a total cost of
$61,900, including the initial installation and setup. In years two and three, the on-going
annual cost is $52,500. This includes access to the cameras, data storage, and access to the
ALPR database. The Department anticipates no more $2,500 will be needed annually to repair
any damaged equipment. The Department intends to use existing COPS funds to fund the initial
deployment.
TIMELINE
The Department is informed that, following Council approval, Flock Safety can complete the
installation and setup process within 8 weeks. Associated Department personnel training and
policy implementation can also be accomplished during this timeframe.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
The Department is contracting for the installation and use – not the purchase – of ALPR
cameras. Flock Safety will complete the installation and setup of the cameras and will be the
owner of the equipment. The cameras are solar-powered and transmit data via a wireless cell
signal, requiring no utility connection. Flock Safety will maintain or replace the cameras as
needed. Data storage - other than specific images identified as evidence in a criminal
investigation - will be the responsibility of Flock Safety who will be responsible for maintaining
CJIS data protocols, and the data will be accessed via a web platform, requiring no new
software.
The implementation of this ALPR technology will come at a total cost of $61,900, including the
initial installation and setup, which should encompass the remainder of FY 2023 and FY 2024.
For subsequent years (FY2025 and FY 2026), costs are projected to be $52,500 annually. This
includes access to the cameras, data storage, and access to the ALPR database. Damaged
cameras will be replaced by Flock Safety at a cost of $500 per camera, with an annual cost not
expected to exceed $2,500. Funding for years one and two of contract will come from the SLES
Fund balance for FY 2023 and FY 2024. Subsequent years of the contract are subject to
appropriation of funds through the annual budget process. Staff will seek to continue use of
grant funds for future funding, however, if unsuccessful, this would be an ongoing General Fund
cost.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The Department participated in a Council ALPR study session on October 24, 2022. Prior to
that, the Department consulted with several other agencies to gather best practices for the
deployment, and oversight of a fixed ALPR program.
In November 2022, the Department met with a representative of the Peninsula Chapter of the
ACLU to better understand the ACLU’s concerns about the use of ALPR technology, and to
discuss the Department’s efforts to be responsive to those concerns in drafting a surveillance
use policy.
Item No. 2301-0741 Page 8 of 8
1
4
1
7
Additionally, in December 2022, the Department accepted invitations to address the topic with
the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce and a neighborhood group.
On February 13, 2023, the Department launched an informational webpage, including an
opportunity for community input. This yielded 7 total submissions: 1 solicitation from an ALPR
vendor, 1 comment questioning the need for ALPR, and 5 supportive comments.
On March 9, 2023, the Department presented a virtual information session on ALPR technology.
A recording was subsequently posted to the Department’s dedicated ALPR webpage, and has
been viewed 30 times.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Approval of this agreement and surveillance policy are categorically exempt under CEQA
regulation 15321 for enforcement actions.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Flock Safety, Contract No. S23187316
Attachment B – Palo Alto Police Fixed ALPR Surveillance Use Policy
Attachment C – ACLU Guidelines
APPROVED BY:
Andrew Binder, Police Chief
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 1 of 64
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. S23187316
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND FLOCK GROUP INC. dba FLOCK
SAFETY
This Agreement for Professional Services (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of the 1st day of
April, 2023 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California
chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and FLOCK GROUP INC. dba FLOCK SAFETY, a
Delaware corporation, Department of Industrial Registration No. PW-LR-1000674310 located at
1170 Howell Mill Road NW, Suite 210, Atlanta, Georgia, 30318 (“CONSULTANT”).
The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement and are fully incorporated herein
by this reference:
RECITALS
A. CITY intends to implement an Automated License Plate Reader System (ALPR) (the
“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to furnish all equipment, equipment maintenance,
installation, materials, tools, and software services to implement ALPR across City of Palo Alto’s
key areas in connection with the Project (the “Services”, as detailed more fully in Exhibit A).
B. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if any, possess the
necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or
certifications to provide the Services.
C. CITY, in reliance on these representations, desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide
the Services as more fully described in Exhibit A, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this
Agreement, the parties agree as follows:
SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described
in Exhibit A in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The
performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
SECTION 2. TERM.
The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through June 30, 2026
unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 (Termination) of this Agreement. CITY shall have
the option to extend the term of this Agreement for one additional renewal term of 24 months,
through June 30, 2028.
SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance
of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 2 of 64
this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit B, entitled “SCHEDULE
OF PERFORMANCE”. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this
Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and
timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT.
CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery
of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT.
SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to
CONSULTANT for performance of the Services shall be based on the compensation structure
detailed in Exhibit C, entitled “COMPENSATION,” including any reimbursable expenses
specified therein, and the maximum total compensation shall not exceed One Hundred Sixty Six
Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($166,900). The hourly schedule of rates, if applicable, is set
out in Exhibit C-1, entitled “SCHEDULE OF RATES.” Any work performed or expenses incurred
for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum compensation set forth in this
Section 4 shall be at no cost to the CITY.
Optional Additional Services Provision (This provision applies only if checked and a
not-to-exceed compensation amount for Additional Services is allocated below under this
Section 4.)
In addition to the not-to-exceed compensation specified above, CITY has set aside an
annual amount of Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500); the total not-to-exceed
compensation amount of Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500) for the
performance of Additional Services (as defined below). The total compensation for
performance of the Services, Additional Services and any reimbursable expenses specified
in Exhibit C, shall not exceed One Hundred Seventy Four Thousand Four Hundred
Dollars ($174,400), as detailed in Exhibit C.
“Additional Services” means any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the
proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services
described at Exhibit A. CITY may elect to, but is not required to, authorize Additional
Services up to the maximum amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in
this Section 4. CONSULTANT shall provide Additional Services only by advanced,
written authorization from CITY as detailed in this Section. Additional Services, if any,
shall be authorized by CITY with a Task Order assigned and authorized by CITY’s Project
Manager, as identified in Section 13 (Project Management). Each Task Order shall be in
substantially the same form as Exhibit A-1, entitled “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK
ORDER”. Each Task Order shall contain a specific scope of services, schedule of
performance and maximum compensation amount, in accordance with the provisions of
this Agreement. Compensation for Additional Services shall be specified by CITY in the
Task Order, based on whichever is lowest: the compensation structure set forth in Exhibit
C, the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit C-1, or a negotiated lump sum.
To accept a Task Order, CONSULTANT shall sign the Task Order and return it to CITY’s
Project Manager within the time specified by the Project Manager, and upon authorization
by CITY (defined as counter-signature by the CITY Project Manager), the fully executed
Task Order shall become part of this Agreement. The cumulative total compensation to
CONSULTANT for all Task Orders authorized under this Agreement shall not exceed the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 3 of 64
amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in this Section 4.
CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for Additional Services performed under an
authorized Task Order and only up to the maximum amount of compensation set forth for
Additional Services in this Section 4. Performance of and payment for any Additional
Services are subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement.
SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly
invoices to the CITY describing the Services performed and the applicable charges (including, if
applicable, an identification of personnel who performed the Services, hours worked, hourly rates,
and reimbursable expenses), based upon Exhibit C or, as applicable, CONSULTANT’s schedule
of rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of
completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s invoices shall be subject to
verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to CITY’s Project Manager at the
address specified in Section 13 (Project Management) below. CITY will generally process and
pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt of an acceptable invoice.
SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All Services shall be performed
by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it,
its employees and subcontractors, if any, possess the professional and technical personnel
necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have
sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT
represents that it, its employees and subcontractors, if any, have and shall maintain during the term
of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature
that are legally required to perform the Services. All Services to be furnished by CONSULTANT
under this Agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among
professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work
throughout California under the same or similar circumstances.
SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of
and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that
may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to
perform Services under this Agreement, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall
procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in
the performance of the Services.
SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT is solely responsible for costs,
including, but not limited to, increases in the cost of Services, arising from or caused by
CONSULTANT’s errors and omissions, including, but not limited to, the costs of corrections such
errors and omissions, any change order markup costs, or costs arising from delay caused by the
errors and omissions or unreasonable delay in correcting the errors and omissions.
SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works
project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of
design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds the CITY’s
stated construction budget by ten percent (10%) or more, CONSULTANT shall make
recommendations to CITY for aligning the Project design with the budget, incorporate CITY
approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost
to CITY.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 4 of 64
SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees
that CONSULTANT and any agent or employee of CONSULTANT will act as and shall be
deemed at all times to be an independent contractor and shall be wholly responsible for the manner
in which CONSULTANT performs the Services requested by CITY under this Agreement.
CONSULTANT and any agent or employee of CONSULTANT will not have employee status
with CITY, nor be entitled to participate in any plans, arrangements, or distributions by CITY
pertaining to or in connection with any retirement, health or other benefits that CITY may offer its
employees. CONSULTANT will be responsible for all obligations and payments, whether
imposed by federal, state or local law, including, but not limited to, FICA, income tax
withholdings, workers’ compensation, unemployment compensation, insurance, and other similar
responsibilities related to CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services, or any agent or
employee of CONSULTANT providing same. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as
creating an employment or agency relationship between CITY and CONSULTANT or any agent
or employee of CONSULTANT. Any terms in this Agreement referring to direction from CITY
shall be construed as providing for direction as to policy and the result of CONSULTANT’s
provision of the Services only, and not as to the means by which such a result is obtained.
SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of
CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign
or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s
obligations hereunder without the prior written approval of the City Manager. Any purported
assignment made without the prior written approval of the City Manager will be void and without
effect. Subject to the foregoing, the covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement
will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assignees of the
parties.
SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING.
Option A: No Subcontractor: CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the
Services to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the City
Manager or designee. In the event CONSULTANT does subcontract any portion of the work to
be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible for all acts and
omissions of subcontractors.
Option B: Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 (Assignment) above, CITY
agrees that subcontractors may be used to complete the Services. The subcontractors authorized
by CITY to perform work on this Project are: None
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subcontractors and for any
compensation due to subcontractors. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning
compensation of subcontractors. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts
and omissions of subcontractors. CONSULTANT shall change or add subcontractors only with
the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee.
SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Kyle Egkan,
Telephone: (714) 469-0389, Email: kyle.egkan@flocksafety.com as the CONSULTANT’s Project
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 5 of 64
Manager to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the
Services and represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day performance of the Services. If
circumstances cause the substitution of the CONSULTANT’s Project Manager or any other of
CONSULTANT’s key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute Project Manager
and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written
approval of the CITY’s Project Manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly
remove CONSULTANT personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable
manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Services
or a threat to the safety of persons or property.
CITY’s Project Manager is Cpt. James Reifschneider, Police Department, Investigative Services
Division, 275 Forest Avenue, Palo Alto, CA, 94301, Telephone: (650) 838-2778. CITY’s Project
Manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and
execution of the Services. CITY may designate an alternate Project Manager from time to time.
SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. All work product, including without
limitation, all writings, drawings, studies, sketches, photographs, plans, reports, specifications,
computations, models, recordings, data, documents, and other materials and copyright interests
developed under this Agreement, in any form or media, shall be and remain the exclusive property
of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights
which arise from creation of the work product pursuant to this Agreement are vested in CITY, and
CONSULTANT hereby waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual
property rights in favor of CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its subcontractors, if any, shall
make any of such work product available to any individual or organization without the prior written
approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the
suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the
Scope of Services.
SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT agrees to permit CITY and its authorized
representatives to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for four (4)
years from the date of final payment, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by
this Agreement, including without limitation records demonstrating compliance with the
requirements of Section 10 (Independent Contractor). CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain
and retain accurate books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles
for at least four (4) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement or the
completion of any audit hereunder, whichever is later.
SECTION 16. INDEMNITY.
16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend
and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an
“Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature,
including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and
expenses of whatever nature including attorney’s fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements
(“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or
nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this
Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 6 of 64
16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to
require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from a Claim arising from the active
negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party that is not contributed to by any act of,
or by any omission to perform a duty imposed by law or agreement by, CONSULTANT, its
officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement.
16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s Services and duties by CITY shall not
operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive
the expiration or early termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 17. WAIVERS. No waiver of a condition or nonperformance of an obligation under
this Agreement is effective unless it is in writing in accordance with Section 29.4 of this
Agreement. No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of this Agreement shall
constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any other instance. Any waiver granted shall
apply solely to the specific instance expressly stated. No single or partial exercise of any right or
remedy will preclude any other or further exercise of any right or remedy.
SECTION 18. INSURANCE.
18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in
full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit
D, entitled “INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS”. CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall
obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or
automobile policy or policies.
18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through
carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or
authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of
CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in
full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY
as an additional insured under such policies as required above.
18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY
concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval
of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary
coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except
after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days’ prior written notice of the cancellation
or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30)
days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written
notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s
receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates
evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term
of this Agreement.
18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be
construed to limit CONSULTANT’s liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification
provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance,
CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 7 of 64
caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including
such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired.
SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES.
19.1. Reserved.
19.2. Reserved.
19.3. In event of suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will be paid for the
Services rendered and work products delivered to CITY in accordance with the Scope of Services
up to the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this
Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be
obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s Services
provided in material conformity with this Agreement as such determination is made by the City
Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will
survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 17, 19.2, 19.3, 19.4, 20, 25,
27, 28, 29 and 30.
19.4. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY
will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement, unless made
in accordance with Section 17 (Waivers).
SECTION 20. NOTICES.
All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by
certified mail, addressed as follows:
To CITY: Office of the City Clerk
City of Palo Alto
Post Office Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
With a copy to the Purchasing Manager
To CONSULTANT: Attention of the Project Manager at the address of
CONSULTANT recited on the first page of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall provide written notice to CITY of any change of address.
SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
21.1. In executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently
has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which
would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services.
21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this
Agreement, it will not employ subcontractors or other persons or parties having such an interest.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 8 of 64
CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this
Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance
with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the
State of California, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT agrees to notify CITY if any
conflict arises.
21.3. If the CONSULTANT meets the definition of a “Consultant” as defined by
the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT will file the
appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the
Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended from time to time.
SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION; COMPLIANCE WITH ADA.
22.1. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.30.510, as amended
from time to time, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not
discriminate in the employment of any person due to that person’s race, skin color, gender, gender
identity, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, pregnancy, genetic
information or condition, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such
person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section
2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the
penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining
to nondiscrimination in employment.
22.2. CONSULTANT understands and agrees that pursuant to the Americans
Disabilities Act (“ADA”), programs, services and other activities provided by a public entity to
the public, whether directly or through a contractor or subcontractor, are required to be accessible
to the disabled public. CONSULTANT will provide the Services specified in this Agreement in a
manner that complies with the ADA and any other applicable federal, state and local disability
rights laws and regulations, as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT will not discriminate
against persons with disabilities in the provision of services, benefits or activities provided under
this Agreement.
SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO
WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the CITY’s Environmentally
Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, hereby
incorporated by reference and as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with
waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero
Waste best practices include, first, minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste; and,
third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the
following Zero Waste requirements:
(a) All printed materials provided by CONSULTANT to CITY generated from a
personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports,
and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater
post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any
submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or
greater post-consumer material and printed with vegetable-based inks.
(b) Goods purchased by CONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in
accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 9 of 64
Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file
at the Purchasing Department’s office.
(c) Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no
additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONSULTANT shall provide documentation from
the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed.
SECTION 24. COMPLIANCE WITH PALO ALTO MINIMUM WAGE ORDINANCE.
CONSULTANT shall comply with all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.62
(Citywide Minimum Wage), as amended from time to time. In particular, for any employee
otherwise entitled to the State minimum wage, who performs at least two (2) hours of work in a
calendar week within the geographic boundaries of the City, CONSULTANT shall pay such
employees no less than the minimum wage set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 4.62.030
for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City of Palo Alto. In addition,
CONSULTANT shall post notices regarding the Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance in
accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 4.62.060.
SECTION 25. NON-APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of
the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to
time. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the
event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal
year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this
Agreement are no longer available. This Section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict
with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement.
SECTION 26. PREVAILING WAGES AND DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC
WORKS CONTRACTS.
26.1. This Project is subject to prevailing wages and related requirements as
a “public works” under California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and related regulations.
CONSULTANT is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in California Labor
Code Section 1773.1 and Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section
16000 et seq., as amended from time to time. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773, the CITY has
obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and
overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute
the contract for this Project from the State of California Department of Industrial Relations
(“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the CITY’s Purchasing Department office. The
general prevailing wage rates are also available at the DIR, Division of Labor Statistics and
Research, web site (see e.g. http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSR/PWD/index.htm) as amended from time
to time. CONSULTANT shall post a copy of the general prevailing wage rates at all Project job
sites and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONSULTANT shall
comply with all applicable provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the California Labor Code
(Labor Code Section 1720 et seq.), including but not limited to Sections 1725.5, 1771, 1771.1,
1771.4, 1773.2, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, 1813 and 1815, and all applicable
implementing regulations, including but not limited to Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code
of Regulations Section 16000 et seq. (8 CCR Section 16000 et seq.), as amended from time to
time. CONSULTANT shall comply with the requirements of Exhibit E, entitled “DIR
REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS”, for any contract for public works
construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance, including but not limited to the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 10 of 64
obligations to register with, and furnish certified payroll records directly to, DIR.
SECTION 27. CLAIMS PROCEDURE FOR “9204 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS”. For
purposes of this Section 27, a “9204 Public Works Project” means the erection, construction,
alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public
improvement of any kind. (Cal. Pub. Cont. Code § 9204.) Per California Public Contract Code
Section 9204, for Public Works Projects, certain claims procedures shall apply, as set forth in
Exhibit F, entitled “Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects”.
This Project is a 9204 Public Works Project and is required to comply with the
claims procedures set forth in Exhibit F, entitled “Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204
Public Works Projects”.
SECTION 28. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
28.1. In the performance of this Agreement, CONSULTANT may have access to
CITY’s Confidential Information (defined below). CONSULTANT will hold Confidential
Information in strict confidence, not disclose it to any third party, and will use it only for the
performance of its obligations to CITY under this Agreement and for no other purpose.
CONSULTANT will maintain reasonable and appropriate administrative, technical and physical
safeguards to ensure the security, confidentiality and integrity of the Confidential Information.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT may disclose Confidential Information to its
employees, agents and subcontractors, if any, to the extent they have a need to know in order to
perform CONSULTANT’s obligations to CITY under this Agreement and for no other purpose,
provided that the CONSULTANT informs them of, and requires them to follow, the confidentiality
and security obligations of this Agreement.
28.2. “Confidential Information” means all data, information (including without
limitation “Personal Information” about a California resident as defined in Civil Code Section
1798 et seq., as amended from time to time) and materials, in any form or media, tangible or
intangible, provided or otherwise made available to CONSULTANT by CITY, directly or
indirectly, pursuant to this Agreement. Confidential Information excludes information that
CONSULTANT can show by appropriate documentation: (i) was publicly known at the time it
was provided or has subsequently become publicly known other than by a breach of this
Agreement; (ii) was rightfully in CONSULTANT’s possession free of any obligation of
confidence prior to receipt of Confidential Information; (iii) is rightfully obtained by
CONSULTANT from a third party without breach of any confidentiality obligation; (iv) is
independently developed by employees of CONSULTANT without any use of or access to the
Confidential Information; or (v) CONSULTANT has written consent to disclose signed by an
authorized representative of CITY.
28.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT may disclose Confidential
Information to the extent required by order of a court of competent jurisdiction or governmental
body, provided that CONSULTANT will notify CITY in writing of such order immediately upon
receipt and prior to any such disclosure (unless CONSULTANT is prohibited by law from doing
so), to give CITY an opportunity to oppose or otherwise respond to such order.
28.4. CONSULTANT will notify City promptly upon learning of any breach in
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 11 of 64
the security of its systems or unauthorized disclosure of, or access to, Confidential Information in
its possession or control, and if such Confidential Information consists of Personal Information,
CONSULTANT will provide information to CITY sufficient to meet the notice requirements of
Civil Code Section 1798 et seq., as applicable, as amended from time to time.
28.5. Prior to or upon termination or expiration of this Agreement,
CONSULTANT will honor any request from the CITY to return or securely destroy all copies of
Confidential Information. All Confidential Information is and will remain the property of the CITY
and nothing contained in this Agreement grants or confers any rights to such Confidential
Information on CONSULTANT.
28.6. If selected in Section 30 (Exhibits), this Agreement is also subject to the
terms and conditions of the Information Privacy Policy and Cybersecurity Terms and Conditions.
SECTION 29. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
29.1. This Agreement will be governed by California law, without regard to its
conflict of law provisions.
29.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such
action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara,
State of California.
29.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this
Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees expended in connection with that
action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value
of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third
parties.
29.4. This Agreement, including all exhibits, constitutes the entire and integrated
agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes
all prior agreements, negotiations, representations, statements and undertakings, either oral or
written. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the
authorized representatives of the parties and approved as required under Palo Alto Municipal
Code, as amended from time to time.
29.5. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this
Agreement is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement will remain in
full force and effect.
29.6. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the
exhibits hereto (per Section 30) or CONSULTANT’s proposal (if any), the Agreement shall
control. In the event of a conflict between the exhibits hereto and CONSULTANT’s proposal (if
any), the exhibits shall control.
29.7. The provisions of all checked boxes in this Agreement shall apply to this
Agreement; the provisions of any unchecked boxes shall not apply to this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 12 of 64
29.8. All section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience and
reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement.
29.9. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which, when
executed by the authorized representatives of the parties, shall together constitute a single binding
agreement.
SECTION 30. EXHIBITS. Each of the following exhibits, if the check box for such exhibit is
selected below, is hereby attached and incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though
fully set forth herein:
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES
ATTACHMENT A-1: FALCON CAMERAS SPECIFICATIONS
ATTACHMENT B-1: STANDARD IMPLEMENTATION
ATTACHMENT C-1: ADVANCED IMPLEMENTATION
ATTACHMENT D-1: ELECTRICIAN INSTALLATION STEPS
EXHIBIT A-1: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER
EXHIBIT B: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
EXHIBIT C: COMPENSATION
EXHIBIT C-1: SCHEDULE OF RATES
EXHIBIT D: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT E: DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
EXHIBIT F: CLAIMS FOR PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 9204
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
EXHIBIT G: SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT H: INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY
EXHIBIT I: CYBERSECURITY TERMS AND CONDITIONS
EXHIBIT J: FLOCK GROUP SERVICES ADDITIONAL TERMS OF
SERVICE
For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the
Exhibits of this Agreement, the Exhibits shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the
preceding section. (Sections 1 through 30 of this Agreement shall have precedence over all of the
Exhibits.) If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City
shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the
best interests of the City.
THIS AGREEMENT IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL SELECTED EXHIBITS
ARE ATTACHED.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 13 of 64
CONTRACT No. S23187316 SIGNATURE PAGE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives
executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
____________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
City Attorney or Designee
(Required on Contracts over $25,000)
FLOCK GROUP INC. dba FLOCK
SAFETY
Officer 1
By:
Name:
Title:
Officer 2 (Required for Corp. or LLC)
By:
Name:
Title:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Mark Smith
General Counsel
CFO
James LaCamp
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 14 of 64
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
CONSULTANT shall provide the Services detailed in this Exhibit A, entitled “SCOPE OF
SERVICES”.
I. AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READER SYSTEM SERVICES
a) CONSULTANT’s surveillance devices shall function as vehicular motion-activated sensors to
detect capturing sight and sound to decode images by narrowing down visual criteria related
searches. CONSULTANT’s Automated License Plate Reader Systems (ALPR or LPR)
includes vehicle fingerprint technology, which will develop machine learning and computer
vision analyses to break down captured evidence into searchable queries. The ALPR will
provide the following:
Visual Evidence by:
vehicle make, type, and color;
license plate (missing plate, covered plate, paper plate, state of the license plate); and
unique features (roof rack, bumper stickers, and window stickers)
Contextual Evidence by:
timestamp;
number of times vehicle has been captured in the last 30 days; and
associated vehicles.
b) CONSULTANT’s database video footage on visual and contextual evidences are
downloadable data deliverables to provide CITY users.
Survey Locations
CONSULTANT shall furnish leasing all equipment, equipment maintenance, installation,
materials, tools, and software services to implement ALPR devices across City of Palo Alto’s
designated key areas that shall include but not limited to the following tasks:
a) CONSULTANT shall coordinate with CITY Project Manager and Public Works department
to present several viable options for solar or AC power camera install feasibility for of up to
forty (40) locations to present a deployment plan for the CITY to review and approve camera
locations. CONSULTANT’s deployment plan shall include a technician to conduct site survey
to:
evaluate/reconfirm feasibility of a location per camera (location assessment, solar
assessment, visibility review, etc.;
check line of sight to the road, safety plans and methods required to perform camera
installation; and
evaluate/reconfirm adequate AT&T or T-Mobile cellular services in the area that is suitable
by placing a white flag per location.
b) CITY shall provide support (if needed) to provide permits, special equipment or vehicles,
custom engineering drawings or traffic plans, concrete cutting and AC-powered installation
source;
c) CONSULTANT shall coordinate with State’s PG&E “811” call service and CITY Utilities
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 15 of 64
department for safe underground digging to mark each camera approved marking location for
underground utilities within a 10-foot radius.
d) In preparation of scheduling camera installation date, CONSULTANT shall ship any site-
specific material(s) that CONSULTANT’s technician does not have on site and coordinate
with CITY staff on scheduling process of any permits required, special equipment, safety
assessment and traffic control safety plans.
Installation (one-time service per camera location)
a) On scheduled start date, CONSULTANT shall mount twenty (20) Falcon Camera devices
(specifications are in detail reference as Attachment A-1) that meet standard installation
procedures for Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway and Assessing Safety Hardware
(NCHRP350/MASH), while adhering to standard procedural plans from the Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
b) Of the 20 camera locations, fourteen (14) cameras shall require Standard Implementation
service, which CONSULTANT shall perform camera mount(s) onto CITY’s existing traffic
pole infrastructure to meet CITY’s/County of Santa Clara’s Right of Way (ROW) for public
use of existing property or future streets, curbs, planting strips or sidewalks. Standard
Implementation is detailed therein in Attachment B-1.
c) The remaining six (6) cameras shall require Advance Implementation service using required
Department of Transportation (DOT) approved standard 12’ CONSULTANT’s above grade
breakaway pole to meet DOT’s “Right of Way and Land Survey” activity requirements within
Caltrans’ Interstate of Highway System geographic boundaries. Advanced Implementation is
detailed therein in Attachment C-1.
d) Upon camera mount installation of each cameras, CONSULTANT shall collaborate with CITY
Utilities department for CITY electrician(s) to install AC power source and connectivity to the
cameras (per Electrician Installation Steps specified in Attachment D-1). CONSULTANT shall
inspect camera to verify device and visual line of sight meets mount/placement specification.
Maintenance
CONSULTANT’s Field Operation team is responsible for physical installation and maintenance
of leased cameras and associated equipment provided by CONSULTANT during term of this
Agreement. This includes CONSULTANT’s team of technicians and maintenance schedulers to
coordinate maintenance service with CITY staff.
Subscription/Software
Post-Camera-Installation, CONSULTANT shall set up a software licensing subscription account
training for CITY Project Manager to designate authorized CITY staff to access CONSULTANT’s
permission web-based portal and provide the CITY with training on best practices to search for
relevant data.
II. ADVANCED SEARCH
CONSULTANT shall collaborate with CITY police staff upon request to perform via the
CONSULTANT’S software web interface to utilize advanced evidence search capabilities to
operate convoy analysis; multi-geo search, visual search queries; and common plate analysis in
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 16 of 64
which the ALPR shall perform:
Visual Search to upload any digital image (i.e.) Ring doorbell footage, closed-circuit
television stills or mobile phone pictures) to conduct vehicle search.
Multi-Geo Search to connect crimes across different locations to a common suspect vehicle
to expedite case clearance and prevent repeat offenses.
Convoy Analysis on identifying vehicles frequently traveling together to identify
accomplices in organized crimes (i.e. Motor Vehicle theft & drug trafficking).
III. ADDITIONAL SERVICES (Optional)
CITY can request for additional surveillance relocation(s), which shall be mutually written in
Agreement as detailed therein within a Task Order (Exhibit A-1 form) per Section 4 of the
Agreement. CONSULTANT shall perform the following optional Additional Services for:
a) camera relocations; and
b) camera and/or pole replacement to reinstall damage, theft or vandalism of ALPR
equipment.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 17 of 64
ATTACHMENT A-1
FALCON CAMERAS SPECIFICATIONS
Falcon Cameras
Use Cases:
CONSULTANT’S SAFETY LICENSE PLATE READERS (LPRs) are designed to capture images
of near license plates, aimed in the direction of traffic.
CONSULTANT’S LPRs are not designed to capture pedestrians, sidewalks, dumpsters, gates, other
areas of non-vehicle traffic, or intersections.
Placement:
It captures vehicles driving away from an intersection.
It cannot point into the middle of an intersection.
It should be placed after the intersection, to prevent “stop and go” motion activation, or “stop and go”
traffic.
Mounting:
It can be mounted on existing utility, light, or traffic signal poles, or 12 foot
CONSULTANT’s poles. **NOTE** Permitting (or permission from pole owner) may be
required in order to use existing infrastructure or install in specific areas,
depending on local regulations & policies.
It should be mounted one per pole*. If using AC power, they can be
mounted 2 per pole.
o *Cameras need sufficient power. Since a solar panel is required per camera,
it can prevent sufficient solar power if 2 cameras and 2 solar panels were on
a single pole (by blocking visibility). Therefore, if relying on solar power, only
one camera can be installed per pole.
They can be powered with solar panels or direct wire-in AC Power (no
outlets). **NOTE** CONSULTANT does not provide Electrical services. Once installed,
the agency or community must work with an electrician to wire the cameras.
Electrician services should be completed within two days of installation to
prevent the camera from dying.
They will require adequate cellular service using AT&T or T-Mobile to be able to
process & send images
Solar Panels
Solar panels need unobstructed southern -facing views
Pole
If a location requires “DOT” approved pole (i.e., not CONSULTANT’s standard pole), the “advanced
implementation” cost will apply per Exhibit C-1, Schedule of Rates
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 18 of 64
ATTACHMENT B-1
STANDARD IMPLEMENTATION
Once designated camera locations are confirmed, as part of the Standard Implementation Service,
CONSULTANT shall perform the following:
a) An in-person site survey to confirm the installation feasibility of a location (location assessment, solar
assessment, visibility review, etc.)
b) Confirm that a location is safe for work by following State utility locating procedures. Work with
local utilities to prevent service interruptions during the installation.
Engage 811 ‘Call-before-you-Dig’ system to receive legal dig date; and
Apply approved markings Coordinate with 811 regarding any necessary high-risk dig
clearances or required vendor meets.
c) Each installation may include the following:
Installation of camera and solar panel with standard, 12’ above grade CONSULTANT’s
break away pole.
Installation of camera and AC adapter that a qualified electrician can connect to AC power.
o CONSULTANT shall provide and mount an AC adapter that a qualified electrician can
connect to AC power following their electrical wiring requirements per Exhibit D-1.
CONSULTANT cannot make any AC connections or boreholes in any material other than
dirt, grass, loose gravel (or other non-diggable material). Electrical work requiring a
licensed electrician and associated costs, not included in the scope of work. CITY staff will
conduct the electrical tasks.
Access requiring up to a 14’ A-frame ladder
Standard MUTCD traffic control procedures performed by a CONSULTANT’s technician
d) Obtain a business license to operate in the City and State of camera location.
OUT OF SCOPE ITEMS
By default, CONSULTANT does not include the following as part of the Advanced Implementation
Service but can optionally provide a quote for sourcing (additional cost):
o Installation on Standard, 12’ above grade Flock breakaway pole or existing infrastructure;
o A Bucket Truck for accessing horizontal/cross-beams and/or height above 14’;
o Special equipment rentals for site access;
o Site-specific engineered traffic plans;
o Third-party provided traffic control;
o State or City-specific specialty contractor licenses;
o Custom engineered drawings;
o Electrical work requires a licensed electrician. CONSULTANT will provide and mount an AC;
adapter that a qualified electrician can connect to AC power but cannot make any AC;
connections or boreholes in any material other than dirt, grass, loose gravel (or other non-
diggable material)
o Concrete cutting;
o Private utility search for privately owned items not included in standard 811 procedures
(communication, networking, sprinklers, etc.);
o Upgrades to power sources to ready them for Flock power (additional fuses, switches, breakers,
etc.)
o Fees or costs associated with filing for required CITY, County, or State permits
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 19 of 64
ATTACHMENT C-1
ADVANCED IMPLEMENTATION
Once designated camera locations are confirmed, as part of the Advanced Implementation Service,
CONSULTANT shall perform the following:
a) An in-person site survey to confirm the installation feasibility of a location (location assessment, solar
assessment, visibility review, etc.)
b) Confirm that a location is safe for work by following State utility locating procedures. Work with
local utilities to prevent service interruptions during the installation.
Engage 811 ‘Call-before-you-Dig’ system to receive legal dig date; and
Apply approved markings Coordinate with 811 regarding any necessary high-risk dig
clearances or required vendor meets.
c) Each installation may include the following:
Installation of camera and solar panel on a suitable NCHRP 350 or MASH approved pole.
Installation of camera and AC adapter that a qualified electrician can connect to AC power.
o CONSULTANT shall provide and mount an AC adapter that a qualified electrician can
connect to AC power following their electrical wiring requirements per Exhibit D-1.
CONSULTANT cannot make any AC connections or boreholes in any material other than
dirt, grass, loose gravel (or other non-diggable material). Electrical work requiring a
licensed electrician and associated costs, not included in the scope of work. CITY staff will
conduct the electrical tasks.
Access requiring up to a 14’ A-frame ladder
Standard MUTCD traffic control procedures performed by a CONSULTANT’s technician
d) Obtain a business license to operate in the City and State of camera location.
OUT OF SCOPE ITEMS
By default, CONSULTANT does not include the following as part of the Advanced Implementation
Service but can optionally provide a quote for sourcing (additional cost):
o Installation on Standard, 12’ above grade Flock breakaway pole or existing infrastructure;
o A Bucket Truck for accessing horizontal/cross-beams and/or height above 14’;
o Special equipment rentals for site access;
o Site-specific engineered traffic plans;
o Third-party provided traffic control;
o State or City-specific specialty contractor licenses;
o Custom engineered drawings;
o Electrical work requires a licensed electrician. CONSULTANT will provide and mount an AC;
adapter that a qualified electrician can connect to AC power but cannot make any AC;
connections or boreholes in any material other than dirt, grass, loose gravel (or other non-
diggable material)
o Concrete cutting;
o Private utility search for privately owned items not included in standard 811 procedures
(communication, networking, sprinklers, etc.);
o Upgrades to power sources to ready them for Flock power (additional fuses, switches, breakers,
etc.)
o Fees or costs associated with filing for required CITY, County, or State permits
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 20 of 64
ATTACHMENT D-1
ELECTRICIAN INSTALLATION STEPS
1. Run AC cable and conduit to the box according to NEC
Article 300 and any applicable local codes. The gland
accepts ½” conduit
2. Run Open the box using hinges
3. Connect AC Mains per wiring diagram below:
a. Connect AC Neutral wire to the Surge Protector
white Neutral wire using the open position on the
lever nut.
b. Connect AC Line wire to the Surge Protector black
Line wire using the open position on the lever nut.
c. Connect AC Ground wire to the Surge Protector
green ground wire using the open position on the
lever nut.
4. Verify that both the RED LED is lit on the front of the box
5. Close box and zip tie the box shut with the provided zip tie
6. While still on site, call Flock who will remotely verify that power is working correctly:
- Southeast Region - (678) 562-8766
- West-Region - (804) 607-9213
- Central & NE Region - (470) 868-4027
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 21 of 64
EXHIBIT A-1
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services detailed below in accordance with all the terms and conditions
of the Agreement referenced in Item 1A below. All exhibits referenced in Item 8 are incorporated into this
Task Order by this reference. CONSULTANT shall furnish the necessary facilities, professional, technical
and supporting personnel required by this Task Order as described below.
CONTRACT NO.
OR PURCHASE ORDER REQUISITION NO. (AS APPLICABLE)
1A. MASTER AGREEMENT NO. (MAY BE SAME AS CONTRACT / P.O. NO. ABOVE):
1B. TASK ORDER NO.:
2. CONSULTANT NAME:
3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: START: COMPLETION:
4 TOTAL TASK ORDER PRICE: $__________________
BALANCE REMAINING IN MASTER AGREEMENT/CONTRACT $_______________
5. BUDGET CODE_______________
COST CENTER________________
COST ELEMENT______________
WBS/CIP__________
PHASE__________
6. CITY PROJECT MANAGER’S NAME & DEPARTMENT:_____________________________________
7. DESCRIPTION OF SCOPE OF SERVICES (Attachment A)
MUST INCLUDE:
SERVICES AND DELIVERABLES TO BE PROVIDED
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
MAXIMUM COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND RATE SCHEDULE (as applicable)
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, if any (with “not to exceed” amount)
8. ATTACHMENTS: A: Task Order Scope of Services B (if any): _____________________________
I hereby authorize the performance of the
work described in this Task Order.
APPROVED:
CITY OF PALO ALTO
BY:____________________________________
Name __________________________________
Title___________________________________
Date ___________________________________
I hereby acknowledge receipt and acceptance of
this Task Order and warrant that I have
authority to sign on behalf of Consultant.
APPROVED:
COMPANY NAME: ______________________
BY:____________________________________
Name __________________________________
Title___________________________________
Date ___________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 22 of 64
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number
of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or
decreased by mutual written agreement of the Project Managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so
long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a
detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the
notice to proceed (“NTP”) from the CITY.
Milestones
Completion
Number of Days/Weeks (as specified
below)
from NTP
1. ALPR Services 20 Camera Installation – Year 1
(one-time service only)
60 days
2. ALPR Services w/ Advanced Search – Year 1
(June 1, 2023-May 31, 2024)
Ongoing within term of Agreement
(subject to completion of milestone 1)
3. ALPR Services w/ Advanced Search – Year 2
(June 1, 2024-May 31, 2025)
Ongoing within term of Agreement
(subject to completion of milestone 1)
4. ALPR Services w/ Advanced Search – Year 3
(June 1, 2025-May 31, 2026)
Ongoing within term of Agreement
(subject to completion of milestone 1)
Optional Schedule of Performance Provision for On-Call or Additional Services Agreements.
(This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on-call agreements per Section 1 or
agreements with Additional Services per Section 4.)
The schedule of performance shall be as provided in the approved Task Order, as detailed in
Section 1 (Scope of Services) in the case of on-call Services, or as detailed in Section 4 in the case
of Additional Services, provided in all cases that the schedule of performance shall fall within the
term as provided in Section 2 (Term) of this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 23 of 64
EXHIBIT C
COMPENSATION
CITY agrees to compensate CONSULTANT for Services performed in accordance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation
shall be calculated based on the rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed
budget amount for each task set forth below.
CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of
the tasks or categories listed below, provided that the total compensation for the Services,
including any specified reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional Services
(if any, per Section 4 of the Agreement) do not exceed the amounts set forth in Section 4 of this
Agreement.
CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, any specified reimbursable expenses, and
Additional Services (if any, per Section 4), within this/these amount(s). Any work performed or
expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of
compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the CITY.
BUDGET SCHEDULE
TASK NOT TO EXCEED
AMOUNT
Task 1
(ALPR Services 20 Camera Installation – Year 1
[one-time service only])
$9,400
Task 2
(ALPR Services w/ Advanced Search – Year 1
[June 1, 2023-May 31, 2024])
$52,500
Task 3
(ALPR Services w/ Advanced Search – Year 2
[June 1, 2024-May 31, 2025])
$52,500
Task 4
(ALPR Services w/ Advanced Search – Year 3
[June 1, 2024-May 31, 2025])
$52,500
Sub-total for Services $166,900
Reimbursable Expenses (if any) $0
Total for Services and Reimbursable Expenses $166,900
Additional Services
(if any, per Section 4 [Year 1 through 3 – $2,500 annually])
$7,500
Maximum Total Compensation $174,400
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
CONSULTANT’S ordinary business expenses, such as administrative, overhead,
administrative support time/overtime, information systems, software and hardware,
photocopying, telecommunications (telephone, internet), in-house printing, insurance and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 24 of 64
other ordinary business expenses, are included within the scope of payment for Services and
are not reimbursable expenses hereunder.
Reimbursable expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this section, will be
reimbursed at actual cost. The expenses (by type, e.g. travel) for which CONSULTANT will
be reimbursed are: NONE up to the not-to-exceed amount of: $0.00.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 25 of 64
EXHIBIT C-1
SCHEDULE OF RATES
CONSULTANT’s schedule of rates is as follows:
CONSULTANT’s Professional Services and One-Time Installation Purchases
Description Price/Usage
Fee
Qty Subtotal
Professional Services - Standard Implementation $350.00 14.00 $4,900.00
Professional Services - Advanced Implementation $750.00 6.00 $4,500.00
Hardware and Software Products
Annual recurring amounts over subscription term:
Description Price/Usage
Fee
Qty Subtotal
Falcon Camera Lease & Software Licensing $2,500.00 20.00 $50,000.00
Flock Safety Advanced Search $2,500.00 1.00 $2,500.00
Additional Service - ALPR Equipment Replacement & Relocation
(includes installation labor):
Description Qty Price/Usage Fee
Camera Replacement 1 $500.00
Pole Replacement 1 $500.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 26 of 64
EXHIBIT D
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT
OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES
WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA.
AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED HEREIN.
REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT
MINIMUM LIMITS
EACH
OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE
YES
YES
WORKER’S COMPENSATION
EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY
STATUTORY
STATUTORY
YES
GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL
INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE
BLANKET CONTRACTUAL,
PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS AND FIRE
LEGAL LIABILITY
BODILY INJURY
PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY
DAMAGE COMBINED.
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
YES TECHNOLOGY ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
LIABILITY COVERAGE. THE POLICY SHALL AT A
MINIMUM COVER PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT
OR LACK OF REQUISITE SKILL FOR THE
PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES DEFINED IN THE
CONTRACT AND SHALL ALSO PROVIDE
COVERAGE FOR THE FOLLOWING RISKS:
(i) NETWORK SECURITY LIABILITYARISING
FROM UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO, USE OF, OR
TAMPERING WITH COMPUTERS OR COMPUTER
SYSTEMS, INCLUDING HACKERS, EXTORTION,
AND
(ii) LIABILITY ARISING FROM
INTRODUCTION OF ANY FORM OF MALICIOUS
SOFTWARE INCLUDING COMPUTER VIRUSES
INTO, OR OTHERWISE CAUSING DAMAGE TO
THE CITY’S OR THIRD PERSON’S COMPUTER,
COMPUTER SYSTEM, NETWORK, OR SIMILAR
COMPUTER RELATED PROPERTY AND THE DATA,
SOFTWARE AND PROGRAMS THEREON.
CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN IN FORCE
DURING THE FULL LIFE OF THE CONTRACT.
THE POLICY SHALL PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR
BREACH RESPONSE COSTS AS WELL AS
REGULATORY FINES AND PENALTIES AS WELL AS
CREDIT MONITORING EXPENSES WITH LIMITS
SUFFICIENT TO RESPOND TO THESE
OBLIGATIONS.
ALL DAMAGES $2,000,000 $2,000,000
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 27 of 64
YES CYBER AND PRIVACY INSURANCE.
SUCH INSURANCE SHALL INCLUDE COVERAGE
FOR LIABILITY ARISING FROM COVERAGE IN AN
AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE FULL
REPLACEMENT VALUE OF DAMAGE TO,
ALTERATION OF, LOSS OF, THEFT,
DISSEMINATION OR DESTRUCTION OF
ELECTRONIC DATA AND/OR USE OF
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, “PROPERTY” OF
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO THAT WILL BE IN THE
CARE, CUSTODY, OR CONTROL OF VENDOR,
INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO, BANK AND CREDIT CARD ACCOUNT
INFORMATION OR PERSONAL INFORMATION,
SUCH AS NAME, ADDRESS, SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBERS, PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION
OR OTHER PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION
INFORMATION, STORED OR TRAMSITTED IN
ELECTRONIC FORM.
ALL DAMAGES $2,000,000 $2,000,000
YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL
OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED
BODILY INJURY
EACH PERSON
EACH OCCURRENCE
PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY
DAMAGE, COMBINED
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
YES
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS
AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN
APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE
ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000
YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE,
SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT
AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS
SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY
AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS,
AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES.
I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE:
A. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR
CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY.
II. CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE AT
THE FOLLOWING URL: https://www.planetbids.com/portal/portal.cfm?CompanyID=25569.
III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL
INSUREDS”
A. PRIMARY COVERAGE
WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE
AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH
ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS.
B. CROSS LIABILITY
THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE
POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 28 of 64
AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL
NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY.
C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE
NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY
WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM,
THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
VENDORS ARE REQUIRED TO FILE THEIR EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE AND ANY OTHER RELATED NOTICES WITH THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AT THE FOLLOWING URL:
HTTPS://WWW.PLANETBIDS.COM/PORTAL/PORTAL.CFM?COMPANYID=25569
OR
HTTP://WWW.CITYOFPALOALTO.ORG/GOV/DEPTS/ASD/PLANET_BIDS_HOW_TO.ASP
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 29 of 64
EXHIBIT E
DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
This Exhibit shall apply only to a contract for public works construction, alteration, demolition,
repair or maintenance work, CITY will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Agreement
with CONSULTANT without proof that CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors are
registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work,
subject to limited exceptions. City requires CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors, if any,
to comply with all applicable requirements of the California Labor Code including but not limited
to Labor Code Sections 1720 through 1861, and all applicable related regulations, including but
not limited to Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section 16000 et seq.,
as amended from time to time. This Exhibit E applies in addition to the provisions of Section 26
(Prevailing Wages and DIR Registration for Public Works Contracts) of the Agreement.
CITY provides notice to CONSULTANT of the requirements of California Labor Code Section
1771.1(a), which reads:
“A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject
to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of
any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified
to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an
unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and
Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the
contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract
is awarded.”
This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. All contractors must
be registered with DIR per Labor Code Section 1725.5 in order to submit a bid. All subcontractors
must also be registered with DIR. No contractor or subcontractor may be awarded a contract for
public work on a public works project unless registered with DIR. Additional information
regarding public works and prevailing wage requirements is available on the DIR web site (see
e.g. http://www.dir.ca.gov) as amended from time to time.
CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors that CONSULTANT is
required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation.
CONSULTANT shall furnish certified payroll records directly to the Labor Commissioner (DIR)
in accordance with Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section 16461 (8
CCR Section 16461).
CITY requires CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of
Labor Code Section 1776, including but not limited to:
Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work
classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem
wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively,
CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 30 of 64
The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available
for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of CONSULTANT and its listed
subcontractors, respectively.
At the request of CITY, acting by its Project Manager, CONSULTANT and its listed
subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon
request to the CITY Project Manager within ten (10) days of receipt of CITY’s request.
CITY requests CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified
payroll records to CITY’s Project Manager at the end of each week during the Project.
If the certified payroll records are not provided as required within the 10-day period, then
CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars
($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and CITY shall withhold the sum
total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to CONSULTANT.
Inform CITY’s Project Manager of the location of CONSULTANT’s and its listed subcontractors’
payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also
provide notice to CITY’s Project Manager within five (5) business days of any change of location
of those payroll records.
Eight (8) hours labor constitutes a legal day’s work. CONSULTANT shall forfeit as a penalty to
CITY, $25.00 for each worker employed in the execution of the Agreement by CONSULTANT
or any subcontractor for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to
work more than eight (8) hours in any one calendar day or forty (40) hours in any one calendar
week in violation of the provisions of the Labor Code, and in particular, Sections 1810 through
1815 thereof, except that work performed by employees of CONSULTANT or any subcontractor
in excess of eight (8) hours per day, or forty (40) hours during any one week, shall be permitted
upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day, or forty (40) hours
per week, at not less than one and one-half (1&1/2) times the basic rate of pay, as provided in
Section 1815.
CONSULTANT shall secure the payment of workers’ compensation to its employees as provided
in Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700 (Labor Code 1861). CONSULTANT shall sign and file
with the CITY a statutorily prescribed statement acknowledging its obligation to secure the
payment of workers’ compensation to its employees before beginning work (Labor Code 1861).
CONSULTANT shall post job site notices per regulation (Labor Code 1771.4(a)(2)).
CONSULTANT shall comply with the statutory requirements regarding employment of
apprentices including without limitation Labor Code Section 1777.5. The statutory provisions will
be enforced for penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages and for failure to comply with wage
and hour laws.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 31 of 64
EXHIBIT F
Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects
The provisions of this Exhibit are provided in compliance with Public Contract Code Section 9204;
they provide the exclusive procedures for any claims pursuant to Public Contract Code Section
9204 related to the Services performed under this Agreement.
1. Claim Definition. “Claim” means a separate demand by the Contractor sent by registered
mail or certified mail with return receipt requested, for one or more of the following:
(A) A time extension, including, without limitation, for relief from damages or penalties for
delay assessed by the City.
(B) Payment by the City of money or damages arising from the Services performed by, or on
behalf of, the Contractor pursuant to the Agreement and payment for which is not otherwise
expressly provided or to which the Contractor is not otherwise entitled.
(C) Payment of an amount that is disputed by the City.
2. Claim Process.
(A) Timing. Any Claim must be submitted to City in compliance with the requirements of
this Exhibit no later than fourteen (14) days following the event or occurrence giving rise to the
Claim. This time requirement is mandatory; failure to submit a Claim within fourteen (14) days
will result in its being deemed waived.
(B) Submission. The Claim must be submitted to City in writing, clearly identified as a
“Claim” submitted pursuant to this Exhibit, and must include reasonable documentation
substantiating the Claim. The Claim must clearly identify and describe the dispute, including
relevant references to applicable portions of the Agreement, and a chronology of relevant events.
Any Claim for additional payment must include a complete, itemized breakdown of all labor,
materials, taxes, insurance, and subcontract, or other costs. Substantiating documentation such as
payroll records, receipts, invoices, or the like, must be submitted in support of each claimed cost.
Any Claim for an extension of time or delay costs must be substantiated with schedule analysis
and narrative depicting and explaining claimed time impacts.
(C) Review. Upon receipt of a Claim in compliance with this Exhibit, the City shall
conduct a reasonable review of the Claim and, within a period not to exceed 45 days from receipt,
shall provide the Contractor a written statement identifying what portion of the Claim is disputed
and what portion is undisputed. Upon receipt of a Claim, the City and Contractor may, by mutual
agreement, extend the time period provided in this paragraph 2.
(D) If City Council Approval Required. If the City needs approval from the City Council
to provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed
portion of the Claim, and the City Council does not meet within the 45 days or within the mutually
agreed to extension of time following receipt of a Claim sent by registered mail or certified mail,
return receipt requested, the City shall have up to three days following the next duly publicly
noticed meeting of the City Council after the 45-day period, or extension, expires to provide the
Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 32 of 64
(E) Payment. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the Claim shall be processed
and made within 60 days after the City issues its written statement. If the City fails to issue a
written statement, paragraph 3, below, shall apply.
3. Disputed Claims
(A) Meet and Confer. If the Contractor disputes the City's written response, or if the City
fails to respond to a Claim submitted pursuant to this Exhibit within the time prescribed, the
Contractor may demand in writing an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the
issues in dispute. Upon receipt of a demand in writing sent by registered mail or certified mail,
return receipt requested, the City shall schedule a meet and confer conference within 30 days for
settlement of the dispute. Within 10 business days following the conclusion of the meet and confer
conference, if the Claim or any portion of the Claim remains in dispute, the City shall provide the
Contractor a written statement identifying the portion of the Claim that remains in dispute and the
portion that is undisputed. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the Claim shall be
processed and made within 60 days after the City issues its written statement.
(B) Mediation. Any remaining disputed portion of the Claim, as identified by the
Contractor in writing, shall be submitted to nonbinding mediation, with the City and the Contractor
sharing the associated costs equally. The City and Contractor shall mutually agree to a mediator
within 10 business days after the disputed portion of the Claim has been identified in writing by
the Contractor. If the parties cannot agree upon a mediator, each party shall select a mediator and
those mediators shall select a qualified neutral third party to mediate the disputed portion of the
Claim. Each party shall bear the fees and costs charged by its respective mediator in connection
with the selection of the neutral mediator. If mediation is unsuccessful, the parts of the Claim
remaining in dispute shall be subject to any other remedies authorized by the Agreement and laws.
(i) For purposes of this paragraph 3.B, mediation includes any nonbinding process, including, but
not limited to, neutral evaluation or a dispute review board, in which an independent third party or
board assists the parties in dispute resolution through negotiation or by issuance of an evaluation.
Any mediation utilized shall conform to the timeframes in this section.
(ii) Unless otherwise agreed to by the City and the Contractor in writing, the mediation conducted
pursuant to this section shall excuse any further obligation, if any, under Public Contract Code
Section 20104.4 to mediate after litigation has been commenced.
4. City’s Failure to Respond. Failure by the City to respond to a Claim from the Contractor
within the time periods described in this Exhibit or to otherwise meet the time requirements of this
Exhibit shall result in the Claim being deemed rejected in its entirety. A Claim that is denied by
reason of the City's failure to have responded to a Claim, or its failure to otherwise meet the time
requirements of this Exhibit, shall not constitute an adverse finding with regard to the merits of
the Claim or the responsibility or qualifications of the Contractor.
5. Interest. Amounts not paid in a timely manner as required by this section shall bear
interest at seven (7) percent per annum.
6. Approved Subcontractor Claims. If an approved subcontractor or a lower tier
subcontractor lacks legal standing to assert a Claim against the City because privity of contract
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 33 of 64
does not exist, the Contractor may present to the City a Claim on behalf of a subcontractor or lower
tier subcontractor. A subcontractor may request in writing, either on his or her own behalf or on
behalf of a lower tier subcontractor, that the Contractor present a Claim for work which was
performed by the subcontractor or by a lower tier subcontractor on behalf of the subcontractor.
The subcontractor requesting that the Claim be presented to the City shall furnish reasonable
documentation to support the Claim. Within 45 days of receipt of this written request, the
Contractor shall notify the subcontractor in writing as to whether the Contractor presented the
claim to the City and, if the Contractor did not present the claim, provide the subcontractor with a
statement of the reasons for not having done so.
7. Waiver of Provisions. A waiver of the rights granted by Public Contract Code Section
9204 is void and contrary to public policy, provided, however, that (1) upon receipt of a Claim,
the parties may mutually agree to waive, in writing, mediation and proceed directly to the
commencement of a civil action or binding arbitration, as applicable; and (2) the City may
prescribe reasonable change order, claim, and dispute resolution procedures and requirements in
addition to the provisions of Public Contract Code Section 9204, so long as the contractual
provisions do not conflict with or otherwise impair the timeframes and procedures set forth in this
section.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 34 of 64
EXHIBIT G
SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE
Surveillance Use Policy for fixed Automated License Plate Recognition
(ALPR) Technology
In accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section PAMC 2.30.680(d), the Surveillance Use
Policy for the Police Department’s use of fixed ALPR technology is as follows:
1. Intended Purpose. The technology is used by the Palo Alto Police Department to convert
data associated with vehicle license plates and vehicle descriptions for official law
enforcement purposes, including but not limited to identifying stolen or wanted vehicles,
stolen license plates and missing persons, suspect interdiction and stolen property recovery.
2. Authorized Uses. Department personnel may only access and use the ALPR system for
official and legitimate law enforcement purposes consistent with this Policy.
The following uses of the ALPR system are specifically prohibited:
a. Harassment or Intimidation: It is a violation of this Policy to use the ALPR system
to harass and/or intimidate any individual or group.
b. Personal Use: It is a violation of this Policy to use the ALPR system or
associated scan files or hot lists for any personal purpose.
c. First Amendment Rights. It is a violation of this policy to use the LPR system or
associated scan files or hot lists for the purpose or known effect of infringing
upon First Amendment rights of any person.
d. Invasion of Privacy: Except when done pursuant to a court order such as a
search warrant, is a violation of this Policy to utilize the ALPR to record license
plates except those of vehicles that are exposed to public view (e.g., vehicles on
a public road or street, or that are on private property but whose license plate(s)
are visible from a public road, street, or a place to which members of the public
have access, such as the parking lot of a shop or other business establishment).
3. Information Collected. A fixed ALPR system captures the date, time, location, license
plate (state, partial, paper, and no plate), and vehicle characteristics (make, model, type,
and color) of passing vehicles. using the Palo Alto Police Department’s ALPR’s system
and the vendor’s vehicle identification technology.
4. Safeguards. All data will be closely safeguarded and protected by both procedural and
technological means. The Palo Alto Police Department will observe the following
safeguards regarding access to and use of stored data (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code
§ 1798.90.53):
a. All ALPR data shall be accessible only through a login/password-protected system
capable of documenting all access of information by name, date, and time.
b. Persons approved to access ALPR data under this policy are permitted to access the
data for legitimate law enforcement purposes only, such as when the data relate to
a specific criminal investigation
c. Such ALPR data may only be released to other authorized and verified local
enforcement officials and agencies for legitimate law enforcement purposes.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 35 of 64
d. Every ALPR system inquiry must be documented by either the associated case
number or incident number, and lawful reason for the inquiry.
5. Retention. The City’s ALPR vendor, Flock Safety, will store the data (data hosting) and
ensure proper maintenance and security of data stored in their data centers. Flock Safety
will purge the data 30 days after collection; however, this will not preclude Palo Alto Police
Department from maintaining any relevant vehicle data obtained from the system after that
period if it has become, or it is reasonable to believe it will become, evidence in a specific
criminal investigation or is subject to a discovery request or other lawful action to produce
records. In those circumstances the applicable data should be downloaded from the server
onto portable media and booked into evidence.
Information gathered or collected, and records retained by Flock Safety cameras will not be sold,
accessed, or used for any purpose other than legitimate law enforcement or public safety purposes.
6. Access by non-City Entities. The ALPR data may be shared only with other local law
enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes or as
otherwise required by law, and as provided below:
a. Requests
i. A law enforcement agency may make a written request for specific data,
including the name of the agency and the intended official law enforcement
purpose for access
ii. The request shall be reviewed by the Chief of Police or the authorized
designee and approved before access is granted
iii. The approved request is retained on file
iv. Requests for ALPR data by non-law enforcement or non-prosecutorial
agencies will be processed by the Department’s custodian of records and
fulfilled only as required by law.
b. Memoranda of Understanding
i. Access to searchable data by other local law enforcement agencies shall
only be granted pursuant to an MOU with that specific agency
ii. Such MOU will provide that access will only be used for legitimate law
enforcement or public safety purposes
c. The Chief of Police or the authorized designee will consider the California Values
Act (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.2 et seq), before
approving the access to ALPR data. The Palo Alto Police Department does not
permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City or its
contractors/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement.
7. Compliance Procedures. The Investigative Services Captain (or other police administrator
as designated by the Police Chief) shall be responsible for compliance with the
requirements of Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq. This includes, but is not limited to (Civil
Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53):
a. Only properly trained sworn officers, crime analysts, and police staff are allowed
access to the ALPR system or to collect ALPR information.
b. Ensuring that training requirements are completed for authorized users.
c. ALPR system monitoring to ensure the security of the information and compliance
with applicable privacy laws.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 36 of 64
d. Ensuring that procedures are followed for system operators and to maintain records
of in compliance with Civil Code § 1798.90.52.
e. The title and name of the current designee in overseeing the ALPR operation is
maintained. Continually working with the Custodian of Records on the retention and destruction
of ALPR data as required.
f. Ensuring this policy and related procedures are conspicuously posted on the
Department’s dedicated ALPR website.
It is the responsibility of the Investigative Services Captain (or other police administrator as
designated by the Police Chief) to ensure that an audit is conducted of ALPR detection inquiries
at least once during each calendar year. The Department will audit a sampling of the ALPR system
utilization from the prior 12-month period to verify proper use in accordance with the above
authorized uses. The audit shall randomly select at least 10 detection browsing inquiries conducted
by department employees during the preceding six-month period and determine if each inquiry
meets the requirements established by policy. This audit shall take the form of an internal
Department memorandum to the Chief of Police. The memorandum shall include any data errors
found so that such errors can be corrected. After review by the Chief of Police, the memorandum
and any associated documentation shall be filed and retained by the Department.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 37 of 64
EXHIBIT H
INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 38 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 39 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 40 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 41 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 42 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 43 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 44 of 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 45 of 64
EXHIBIT I
CYBERSECURITY TERMS AND CONDITIONS
In order to assure the privacy and security of the personal information of the City's customers and
people who do business with the City, including, without limitation, vendors, utility customers,
library patrons, and other individuals and companies, who are required to share such information
with the City, as a condition of receiving services from the City or selling goods and services to
the City, including, without limitation, the Software as a Service services provider (the
"Consultant") and its subcontractors, if any, including, without limitation, any Information
Technology ("IT") infrastructure services provider, shall design, install, provide, and maintain a
secure IT environment, described below, while it renders and performs the Services and furnishes
goods, if any, described in the Statement of Work, Exhibit B, to the extent any scope of work
implicates the confidentiality and privacy of the personal information of the City's customers. The
Consultant shall fulfill the data and information security requirements (the "Requirements") set
forth in Part A below.
A "secure IT environment" includes (a) the IT infrastructure, by which the Services are provided
to the City, including connection to the City's IT systems; (b) the Consultant's operations and
maintenance processes needed to support the environment, including disaster recovery and
business continuity planning; and (c) the IT infrastructure performance monitoring services to
ensure a secure and reliable environment and service availability to the City. "IT infrastructure"
refers to the integrated framework, including, without limitation, data centers, computers, and
database management devices, upon which digital networks operate.
In the event that, after the Effective Date, the Consultant reasonably determines that it cannot fulfill
the Requirements, the Consultant shall promptly inform the City of its determination and submit,
in writing, one or more alternate countermeasure options to the Requirements (the "Alternate
Requirements" as set forth in Part B), which may be accepted or rejected in the reasonable
satisfaction of the Information Security Manager (the "ISM").
Part A. Requirements:
The Consultant shall at all times during the term of any contract between the City and the
Consultant:
(a) Appoint or designate an employee, preferably an executive officer, as the security liaison
to the City with respect to the Services to be performed under this Agreement.
(b) Comply with the City's Information Privacy Policy:
(c) Have adopted and implemented information security and privacy policies that are
documented, are accessible to the City, and conform to ISO 27001/2 – Information Security
Management Systems (ISMS) Standards. See the following:
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=42103
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=50297
(d) Conduct routine data and information security compliance training of its personnel that is
appropriate to their role.
(e) Develop and maintain detailed documentation of the IT infrastructure, including software
versions and patch levels.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 46 of 64
(f) Develop an independently verifiable process, consistent with industry standards, for
performing professional and criminal background checks of its employees that (1) would
permit verification of employees' personal identity and employment status, and (2) would
enable the immediate denial of access to the City's confidential data and information by
any of its employees who no longer would require access to that information or who are
terminated.
(g) Provide a list of IT infrastructure components in order to verify whether the Consultant
has met or has failed to meet any objective terms and conditions.
(h) Implement access accountability (identification and authentication) architecture and
support role-based access control ("RBAC") and segregation of duties ("SoD")
mechanisms for all personnel, systems, and Software used to provide the Services.
"RBAC" refers to a computer systems security approach to restricting access only to
authorized users. "SoD" is an approach that would require more than one individual to
complete a security task in order to promote the detection and prevention of fraud and
errors.
(i) Assist the City in undertaking annually an assessment to assure that: (1) all elements of the
Services' environment design and deployment are known to the City, and (2) it has
implemented measures in accordance with industry best practices applicable to secure
coding and secure IT architecture.
(j) Provide and maintain secure intersystem communication paths that would ensure the
confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the City's information.
(k) Deploy and maintain IT system upgrades, patches and configurations conforming to
current patch and/or release levels by not later than one (1) week after its date of release.
Emergency security patches must be installed within 24 hours after its date of release.
(l) Provide for the timely detection of, response to, and the reporting of security incidents,
including on-going incident monitoring with logging.
(m) Notify the City within one (1) hour of detecting a security incident that results in the
unauthorized access to or the misuse of the City's confidential data and information.
(n) Inform the City that any third party service provider(s) meet(s) all of the Requirements.
(o) Perform security self-audits on a regular basis and not less frequently than on a quarterly
basis, and provide the required summary reports of those self-audits to the ISM on the
annual anniversary date or any other date agreed to by the Parties.
(p) Accommodate, as practicable, and upon reasonable prior notice by the City, the City's
performance of random site security audits at the Consultant's site(s), including the site(s)
of a third-party service provider(s), as applicable. The scope of these audits will extend to
the Consultant's and its third-party service provider(s)' awareness of security policies and
practices, systems configurations, access authentication and authorization, and incident
detection and response.
(q) Cooperate with the City to ensure that to the extent required by applicable laws, rules and
regulations, and the Confidential Information will be accessible only by the Consultant and
any authorized third-party service provider's personnel.
(r) Perform regular, reliable secured backups of all data needed to maximize the availability
of the Services. Adequately encrypt the City of Palo Alto's data, during the operational
process, hosted at rest, and the backup stage at the Vendors' environment (including
Vendor's contracting organization's environment).
(s) Maintain records relating to the Services for a period of three (3) years after the expiration
or earlier termination of this Agreement and in a mutually agreeable storage medium.
Within thirty (30) days after the effective date of expiration or earlier termination of this
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 47 of 64
Agreement, all of those records relating to the performance of the Services shall be
provided to the ISM.
(t) Maintain the Confidential Information in accordance with applicable federal, state, and
local data and information privacy laws, rules, and regulations.
(u) Encrypt the Confidential Information before delivering the same by electronic mail to the
City and or any authorized recipient.
(v) Provide Network Layer IP filtering services to allow access only from the City of Palo
Alto's IP address to the Vendor environment (primarily hosted for the City of Palo Alto).
(w) Offer a robust disaster recovery and business continuity (DR-BCP) solutions to the City
for the systems and services the Vendor provides to the City.
(x) Provide and support Single Sign-on (SSO) and Multifactor Authentication (MFA)
solutions for authentication and authorization services from the "City's environment to the
Vendor's environment," and Vendor's environment to the Vendor's cloud services/hosted
environment." The Vendor shall allow two employees of the City to have superuser and
super-admin access to the Vendor's IT environment, and a cloud-hosted IT environment
belongs to the City.
(y) Unless otherwise addressed in the Agreement, shall not hold the City liable for any direct,
indirect or punitive damages whatsoever including, without limitation, damages for loss of
use, data or profits, arising out of or in any way connected with the City's IT environment,
including, without limitation, IT infrastructure communications.
(z) The Vendor must provide evidence of valid cyber liability insurance policy per the City’s
EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 48 of 64
EXHIBIT J
FLOCK GROUP SERVICES ADDITIONAL TERMS OF SERVICE
FLOCK GROUP INC.
SERVICES AGREEMENT
ORDER FORM
This Order Form together with the Terms (as defined herein) describe the relationship between
Flock Group Inc. (“Flock”) and the customer identified below (“Agency”) (each of Flock and
Customer, a ”Party”). This order form (“Order Form”) hereby incorporates and includes the
“GOVERNMENT AGENCY AGREEMENT” attached (the “Terms”) which describe and set
forth the general legal terms governing the relationship (collectively, the "Agreement" ). The
Terms contain, among other things, warranty disclaimers, liability limitations and use
limitations.
The Agreement will become effective when this Order Form is executed by both Parties (the
“Effective Date”).
Agency: CA - Palo Alto Police Department
Legal Entity Name: City of Palo Alto
Contact Name: James Reifschneider
Address:
275 Forest Ave
Palo Alto, California 94301
Phone: (650) 329-2406
E-Mail:
james.reifschneider@cityofpaloalto.org
Expected Payment Method:
\FSExpectedPaymentMethod1\
Billing Contact: \FSBillingContact1\
(if different than above)
Initial Term: 36 months
Optional Renewal Term: 24 months
Billing Term: Annual payment due Net 30
per terms and conditions
Billing Frequency: Annual Plan - First Year
Invoiced at Signing
Professional Services and One-Time Purchases
Name Price/Usage
Fee
QTY Subtotal
Professional Services - Standard Implementation
Fee $350.00 14.00 $4,900.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 49 of 64
Professional Services - Advanced
Implementation Fee $750.00 6.00 $4,500.00
Hardware and Software Products
Annual recurring amounts over subscription term
Name Price/Usage
Fee
QTY Subtotal
Falcon $2,500.00 20.00 $50,000.00
Flock Safety Advanced Search $2,500.00 1.00 $2,500.00
Subscription with Installation Subtotal Year 1: $61,900.00
Annual Subscription Year 2 & 3 Subtotal: $104,000.00
Subscription Term: 36 Months
Estimated Sales Tax: $0.00
Total Year 1 through 3 Subscription Amount: $166,900.00
Additional Services for Camera & Pole Relocation/Replacement (if any): $ 7,500.00
Maximum Subscription and Additional Services Total: $174,400.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 50 of 64
GOVERNMENT AGENCY AGREEMENT
This Government Agency Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into by and between Flock
Group, Inc. with a place of business at 1170 Howell Mill Rd NW Suite 210, Atlanta, GA 30318
(“Flock”) and the police department or government agency identified in the signature block this
Agreement (“Agency”) (each a “Party,” and together, the “Parties”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Flock offers a software and hardware situational awareness solution for automatic
license plates, video and audio detection through Flock’s technology platform (the “Flock
Service”), and upon detection, the Flock Services are capable of capturing audio, video, image,
and recording data and can provide notifications to Agency upon the instructions of Non-Agency
End User (as defined below) (“Notifications”);
WHEREAS, Agency desires access to the Flock Service on existing cameras, provided by
Agency, or Flock provided Flock Hardware (as defined below) in order to create, view, search
and archive Footage and receive Notifications, including those from Non-Agency End Users of
the Flock Service (where there is an investigative or bona fide lawful purpose) such as schools,
neighborhood homeowners associations, businesses, and individual users;
WHEREAS, Flock deletes all Footage on a rolling thirty (30) day basis, excluding Wing Replay
which is deleted after seven (7) days. Agency is responsible for extracting, downloading and
archiving Footage from the Flock System on its own storage devices for auditing for
prosecutorial/administrative purposes; and
WHEREAS, Flock desires to provide Agency the Flock Service and any access thereto, subject
to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, solely for the awareness, prevention, and
prosecution of crime, bona fide investigations by police departments, and archiving for evidence
gathering (“Permitted Purpose”).
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, Flock and Agency agree that this Agreement, and any addenda attached
hereto or referenced herein, constitute the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement of
the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and replace and supersede all
prior agreements, term sheets, purchase orders, correspondence, oral or written communications
and negotiations by and between the Parties.
1. DEFINITIONS
Certain capitalized terms, not otherwise defined herein, have the meanings set forth or cross-
referenced in this Section 1.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 51 of 64
1.1 “Advanced Search” means the provision of Services, via the web interface using Flock’s
software applications, which utilize advanced evidence delivery capabilities including convoy
analysis, multi-geo search, visual search, cradlepoint integration for automatic vehicle location,
and common plate analysis.
1.2 “Agency Data” means the data, media and content provided by Agency through the Services.
For the avoidance of doubt, the Agency Data will include the Footage.
1.3 “Agency Generated Data” means the messages, text, illustrations, files, images, graphics,
photos, comments, sounds, music, videos, information, content, ratings, reviews, data, questions,
suggestions, other information or materials posted, uploaded, displayed, published, distributed,
transmitted, broadcasted, or otherwise made available on or submitted through the Wing Suite.
1.4. “Agency Hardware” means the third-party camera owned or provided by Agency and any
other physical elements that interact with the Embedded Software and the Web Interface to
provide the Services.
1.5. “Aggregated Data” means information that relates to a group or category of individuals,
from which any potential individuals’ personal identifying information has been permanently
“anonymized” by commercially available standards to irreversibly alter data in such a way that a
data subject (i.e., individual person or impersonal entity) can no longer be identified directly or
indirectly.
1.6 “Authorized End User(s)” means any individual employees, agents, or contractors of
Agency accessing or using the Services through the Web Interface, under the rights granted to
Agency pursuant to this Agreement.
1.7 “Deployment Plan” means the strategic geographic mapping of the location(s) and
implementation of Flock Hardware, and/or other relevant Services required under this
Agreement.
1.8 “Documentation” means text and/or graphical documentation, whether in electronic or
printed format, that describe the features, functions and operation of the Services which are
provided by Flock to Agency in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
1.9 “Embedded Software” means the software and/or firmware embedded or preinstalled on the
Flock Hardware or Agency Hardware.
1.10 “Falcon Flex” means an infrastructure-free, location-flexible license plate reader camera
that enables the Agency to self-install.
1.11 “Flock Hardware” means the Flock cameras or device, pole, clamps, solar panel,
installation components, and any other physical elements that interact with the Embedded
Software and the Web Interface to provide the Flock Services.
1.12 “Flock IP” means the Services, the Documentation, the Embedded Software, the
Installation Services, and any and all intellectual property therein or otherwise provided to
Agency and/or its Authorized End Users in connection with the foregoing.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 52 of 64
1.13 “Flock Safety Falcon™” means an infrastructure-free license plate reader camera that
utilizes Vehicle Fingerprint™ technology to capture vehicular attributes.
1.14 “Flock Safety Raven™” means an audio detection device that provides real-time alerting to
law enforcement based on programmed audio events such as gunshots, breaking glass, and street
racing.
1.15 “Flock Safety Sparrow™” means an infrastructure-free license plate reader camera for
residential roadways that utilizes Vehicle Fingerprint™ technology to capture vehicular
attributes.
1.17 “Footage” means still images, video, audio and other data captured by the Flock Hardware
or Agency Hardware in the course of and provided via the Services.
1.18 “Hotlist(s)” means a digital file containing alphanumeric license plate related information
pertaining to vehicles of interest, which may include stolen vehicles, stolen vehicle license
plates, vehicles owned or associated with wanted or missing person(s), vehicles suspected of
being involved with criminal or terrorist activities, and other legitimate law enforcement
purposes. Hotlist also includes, but is not limited to, national data (i.e. NCIC) for similar
categories, license plates associated with AMBER Alerts or Missing Persons/Vulnerable Adult
Alerts, and includes manually entered license plate information associated with crimes that have
occurred in any local jurisdiction.
1.19 “Implementation Fee(s)” means the monetary fees associated with the Installation
Services, as defined below.
1.20 “Installation Services” means the services provided by Flock for installation of Agency
Hardware and/or Flock Hardware, including any applicable installation of Embedded Software
on Agency Hardware.
1.21 “Non-Agency End User(s)” means any individual, entity, or derivative therefrom,
authorized to use the Services through the Web Interface, under the rights granted to pursuant to
the terms (or to those materially similar) of this Agreement.
1.22 “Services” or “Flock Services” means the provision, via the Web Interface, of Flock’s
software applications for automatic license plate detection, alerts, audio detection, searching
image records, video and sharing Footage.
1.23 “Support Services” means Monitoring Services, as defined in Section 2.10 below.
1.24 “Usage Fee” means the subscription fees to be paid by the Agency for ongoing access to
Services.
1.25 “Web Interface” means the website(s) or application(s) through which Agency and its
Authorized End Users can access the Services, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 53 of 64
1.26 “Wing Suite” means the Flock interface which provides real-time access to the Flock
Services, location of Flock Hardware, Agency Hardware, third-party cameras, live-stream video,
Wing Livestream, Wing LPR, Wing Replay, alerts and other integrations.
1.27 “Wing Livestream” means real-time video integration with third-party cameras via the
Flock interface.
1.28 “Wing LPR” means software integration with third-party cameras utilizing Flock’s Vehicle
Fingerprint Technology™ for license plate capture.
1.29 “Wing Replay” means enhanced situational awareness encompassing Footage retention,
replay ability, and downloadable content from Hot Lists integrated from third-party cameras.
1.30 “Vehicle Fingerprint™” means the unique vehicular attributes captured through Services
such as: type, make, color, state registration, missing/covered plates, bumper stickers, decals,
roof racks, and bike racks.
2. SERVICES AND SUPPORT
2.1 Provision of Access. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Flock hereby grants to Agency
a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access the features and functions of the Services via
the Web Interface during the Term, solely for the Authorized End Users. The Footage will be
available for Agency’s designated administrator, listed on the Order Form, and any Authorized
End Users to access and download via the Web Interface for thirty (30) days. Authorized End
Users will be required to sign up for an account and select a password and username (“User
ID”). Flock will also provide Agency with the Documentation to be used in accessing and using
the Services. Agency shall be responsible for all acts and omissions of Authorized End Users,
and any act or omission by an Authorized End User which, if undertaken by Agency, would
constitute a breach of this Agreement, shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement by Agency.
Agency shall undertake reasonable efforts to make all Authorized End Users aware of the
provisions of this Agreement as applicable to such Authorized End User’s use of the Services
and shall cause Authorized End Users to comply with such provisions. Flock may use the
services of one or more third parties to deliver any part of the Services, (such as using a third
party to host the Web Interface for cloud storage or a cell phone provider for wireless cellular
coverage) which makes the Services available to Agency and Authorized End Users. Warranties
provided by said third party service providers are the agency’s sole and exclusive remedy and
Flock’s sole and exclusive liability with regard to such third-party services, including without
limitation hosting the Web Interface. Agency agrees to comply with any acceptable use policies
and other terms of any third-party service provider that are provided or otherwise made available
to Agency from time to time.
2.2 Embedded Software License. Subject to all terms of this Agreement, Flock grants Agency a
limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable (except to the Authorized End
Users), revocable right to use the Embedded Software as installed on the Flock Hardware or
Agency Hardware; in each case, solely as necessary for Agency to use the Services.
2.3 Documentation License. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Flock hereby grants to
Agency a non-exclusive, non-transferable right and license to use the Documentation during the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 54 of 64
Term in connection with its use of the Services as contemplated herein, and under Section 2.5
below.
2.4 Wing Suite License. Subject to all terms of this Agreement, Flock grants Agency a limited,
non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable (except to the Authorized End Users),
revocable right to use the Wing Suite software and interface.
2.5 Usage Restrictions.
2.5.1 Flock IP. The permitted purpose for usage of the Flock Hardware, Agency Hardware,
Documentation, Services, support, and Flock IP are solely to facilitate gathering evidence that
could be used in a lawful criminal investigation by the appropriate government agency
(“Permitted Purpose”). Agency will not, and will not permit any Authorized End Users to, (i)
copy or duplicate any of the Flock IP; (ii) decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, or otherwise
attempt to obtain or perceive the source code from which any software component of any of the
Flock IP is compiled or interpreted, or apply any other process or procedure to derive the source
code of any software included in the Flock IP; (iii) attempt to modify, alter, tamper with or repair
any of the Flock IP, or attempt to create any derivative product from any of the foregoing; (iv)
interfere or attempt to interfere in any manner with the functionality or proper working of any of
the Flock IP; (v) remove, obscure, or alter any notice of any intellectual property or proprietary
right appearing on or contained within any of the Services or Flock IP; (vi) use the Services,
support, Flock Hardware, Documentation, or the Flock IP for anything other than the Permitted
Purpose; or (vii) assign, sublicense, sell, resell, lease, rent, or otherwise transfer, convey, pledge
as security, or otherwise encumber, Agency’s rights under Sections 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, or 2.4.
2.5.2. Flock Hardware. Agency understands that all Flock Hardware is owned exclusively by
Flock, and that title to any Flock Hardware does not pass to Agency upon execution of this
Agreement. Except for Falcon Flex products, which are designed for self-installation, Agency is
not permitted to remove, reposition, re-install, tamper with, alter, adjust or otherwise take
possession or control of Flock Hardware. Notwithstanding the notice and cure period set for in
Section 6.3, Agency agrees and understands that in the event Agency is found to engage in any
of the restricted actions of this Section 2.5.2, all warranties herein shall be null and void, and this
Agreement shall be subject to immediate termination (without opportunity to cure) for material
breach by Agency.
2.6 Retained Rights; Ownership. As between the Parties, subject to the rights granted in this
Agreement, Flock and its licensors retain all right, title and interest in and to the Flock IP and its
components, and Agency acknowledges that it neither owns nor acquires any additional rights in
and to the foregoing not expressly granted by this Agreement. Agency further acknowledges that
Flock retains the right to use the foregoing for any purpose in Flock’s sole discretion. There are
no implied rights.
2.7 Suspension.
2.7.1 Service Suspension. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Flock
may temporarily suspend Agency’s and any Authorized End User’s access to any portion or all
of the Flock IP or Flock Service if Flock reasonably determines that (a) there is a threat or attack
on any of the Flock IP by Agency; (b) Agency’s or any Authorized End User’s use of the Flock
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 55 of 64
IP disrupts or poses a security risk to the Flock IP or any other customer or vendor of Flock; (c)
Agency or any Authorized End User is/are using the Flock IP for fraudulent or illegal activities;
(d) Agency has violated any term of this provision, including, but not limited to, utilizing the
Services for anything other than the Permitted Purpose; or (e) any unauthorized access to Flock
Services through Agency’s account (“Service Suspension”). Agency shall not be entitled to any
remedy for the Service Suspension period, including any reimbursement, tolling, or credit.
2.7.2 Service Interruption. Services may be interrupted in the event that: (a) Flock’s provision
of the Services to Agency or any Authorized End User is prohibited by applicable law; (b) any
third-party services required for Services are interrupted; (c) if Flock reasonably believe Services
are being used for malicious, unlawful, or otherwise unauthorized use; (d) there is a threat or
attack on any of the Flock IP by a third party; or (e) scheduled or emergency maintenance
(“Service Interruption”). Flock will make commercially reasonable efforts to provide written
notice of any Service Interruption to Agency and to provide updates regarding resumption of
access to Flock Services. Flock will use commercially reasonable efforts to resume providing
access to the Services as soon as reasonably possible after the event giving rise to the Service
Interruption is cured. Flock will have no liability for any damage, liabilities, losses (including
any loss of data or profits), or any other consequences that Agency or any Authorized End User
may incur as a result of a Service Interruption. To the extent that the Service Interruption is not
caused by Agency’s direct actions or by the actions of parties associated with the Agency, the
expiration of the Term will be tolled by the duration of the Service Interruption (for any
continuous suspension lasting at least one full day) prorated for the proportion of cameras on the
Agency’s account that have been impacted. For example, in the event of a Service Interruption
lasting five (5) continuous days, Agency will receive a credit for five (5) free days at the end of
the Term.
2.8 Installation Services.
2.8.1 Designated Locations. For installation of Flock Hardware, excluding Falcon Flex products,
prior to performing the physical installation of the Flock Hardware, Flock shall advise Agency
on the location and positioning of the Flock Hardware for optimal license plate image capture, as
conditions and location allow. Flock may consider input from Agency regarding location,
position and angle of the Flock Hardware (“Designated Location”) and collaborate with Agency
to design the Deployment Plan confirming the Designated Locations. Flock shall have final
discretion on location of Flock Hardware. Flock shall have no liability to Agency resulting from
any poor performance, functionality or Footage resulting from or otherwise relating to the
Designated Locations or delay in installation due to Agency’s delay in confirming Designated
Locations, in ordering and/or having the Designated Location ready for installation including
having all electrical work preinstalled and permits ready, if necessary. After installation, any
subsequent changes to the Deployment Plan (“Reinstalls”) will incur a charge for Flock’s then-
current list price for Reinstalls, as listed in the then-current Reinstall policy (available at
https://www.flocksafety.com/reinstall-fee-schedule) and any equipment fees. For clarity, Agency
will receive prior notice and provide approval for any such fees. These changes include but are
not limited to re-positioning, adjusting of the mounting, re-angling, removing foliage,
replacement, changes to heights of poles, regardless of whether the need for Reinstalls related to
vandalism, weather, theft, lack of criminal activity in view, and the like. Flock shall have full
discretion on decision to reinstall Flock Hardware.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 56 of 64
2.8.2 Agency Installation Obligations. Agency agrees to allow Flock and its agents reasonable
access in and near the Designated Locations at all reasonable times upon reasonable notice for
the purpose of performing the installation work. Although Flock Hardware is designed to utilize
solar power, certain Designated Locations may require a reliable source of 120V or 240V AC
power. In the event adequate solar power is not available, Agency is solely responsible for costs
associated with providing a reliable source of 120V or 240V AC power to Flock Hardware.
Flock will provide solar options to supply power at each Designated Location. If Agency refuses
recommended solar options, Agency waives any reimbursement, tolling, or credit for any
suspension period of Flock Services due to low solar power. Additionally, Agency is solely
responsible for (i) any permits or associated costs, and managing the permitting process of
installation of cameras or AC power; (ii) any federal, state, or local taxes including property,
license, privilege, sales, use, excise, gross receipts, or other similar taxes which may now or
hereafter become applicable to, measured by or imposed upon or with respect to the installation
of the Flock Hardware, its use (excluding tax exempt entities), or (iii) any other supplementary
cost for services performed in connection with installation of the Flock Hardware, including but
not limited to contractor licensing, engineered drawings, rental of specialized equipment, or
vehicles, third-party personnel (i.e. Traffic Control Officers, Electricians, State DOT-approved
poles, etc., if necessary), such costs to be approved by the Agency (“Agency Installation
Obligations”). In the event that a Designated Location for Flock Hardware requires permits,
Flock may provide the Agency with a temporary alternate location for installation pending the
permitting process. Once the required permits are obtained, Flock will relocate the Flock
Hardware from the temporary alternate location to the permitted location at no additional cost.
Without being obligated or taking any responsibility for the foregoing, Flock may pay and
invoice related costs to Agency if Agency did not address them prior to the execution of this
Agreement or a third party requires Flock to pay. Agency represents and warrants that it has, or
shall lawfully obtain, all necessary right title and authority and hereby authorizes Flock to install
the Flock Hardware at the Designated Locations and to make any necessary inspections or tests
in connection with such installation.
2.8.3 Flock’s Obligations. Installation of Flock Hardware shall be installed in a workmanlike
manner in accordance with Flock’s standard installation procedures, and the installation will be
completed within a reasonable time from the time that the Designated Locations are confirmed.
Upon removal of Flock Hardware, Flock shall restore the location to its original condition,
ordinary wear and tear excepted. Following the initial installation of the Flock Hardware and any
subsequent Reinstalls or maintenance operations, Flock’s obligation to perform installation work
shall cease; however, for the sole purpose of validating installation, Flock will continue to
monitor the performance of Flock Hardware for the length of the Term and will receive access to
the Footage for a period of seven (7) business days after the initial installation for quality control
and provide any necessary maintenance. Labor may be provided by Flock or a third-party. Flock
is not obligated to install, reinstall, or provide physical maintenance to Agency Hardware.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Agency understands that Flock will not provide
installation services for Falcon Flex products.
2.8.4 Ownership of Hardware. Flock Hardware shall remain the personal property of Flock and
will be removed upon the natural expiration of this Agreement at no additional cost to Agency.
Agency shall not perform any acts which would interfere with the retention of title of the Flock
Hardware by Flock. Should Agency default on any payment of the Flock Services, Flock may
remove Flock Hardware at Flock’s discretion. Such removal, if made by Flock, shall not be
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 57 of 64
deemed a waiver of Flock’s rights to any damages Flock may sustain as a result of Agency’s
default and Flock shall have the right to enforce any other legal remedy or right.
2.9 Hazardous Conditions. Unless otherwise stated in the Agreement, Flock’s price for its
services under this Agreement does not contemplate work in any areas that contain hazardous
materials, or other hazardous conditions, including, without limit, asbestos, lead, toxic or
flammable substances. In the event any such hazardous materials are discovered in the
designated locations in which Flock is to perform services under this Agreement, Flock shall
have the right to cease work immediately in the area affected until such materials are removed or
rendered harmless.
2.10 Support Services. Subject to the payment of fees, Flock shall monitor the performance and
functionality of Flock Services and may, from time to time, advise Agency on changes to the
Flock Services, Installation Services, or the Designated Locations which may improve the
performance or functionality of the Services or may improve the quality of the Footage. The
work, its timing, and the fees payable relating to such work shall be agreed by the Parties prior to
any alterations to or changes of the Services or the Designated Locations (“Monitoring
Services”). Flock will use commercially reasonable efforts to respond to requests for support.
Flock will provide Agency with reasonable technical and on-site support and maintenance
services (“On-Site Services”) in-person or by email at support@flocksafety.com, at no additional
cost. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Agency is solely responsible for installation of
Falcon Flex products. Agency further understands and agrees that Flock will not provide
monitoring services or on-site services for Falcon Flex.
2.11 Special Terms. From time to time, Flock may offer certain special terms related to
guarantees, service and support which are indicated in the proposal and on the Order Form and
will become part of this Agreement, upon Agency’s prior written consent (“Special Terms”). To
the extent that any terms of this Agreement are inconsistent or conflict with the Special Terms,
the Special Terms shall control.
2.12 Upgrades to Platform. Flock may, in its sole discretion, make any upgrades to system or
platform that it deems necessary or useful to (i) maintain or enhance (a) the quality or delivery of
Flock’s products or services to its agencies, (b) the competitive strength of, or market for,
Flock’s products or services, (c) such platform or system’s cost efficiency or performance, or (ii)
to comply with applicable law. Parties understand that such upgrades are necessary from time to
time and will not materially change any terms or conditions within this Agreement.
3. RESTRICTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
3.1 Agency Obligations. Flock will assist Agency Authorized End Users in the creation of a
User ID. Agency agrees to provide Flock with accurate, complete, and updated registration
information. Agency may not select as its User ID a name that Agency does not have the right to
use, or another person’s name with the intent to impersonate that person. Agency may not
transfer its account to anyone else without prior written permission of Flock. Agency will not
share its account or password with anyone and must protect the security of its account and
password. Unless otherwise stated and defined in this Agreement, Agency may not designate
Authorized End Users for persons who are not officers, employees, or agents of Agency.
Authorized End Users shall only use Agency-issued email addresses for the creation of their
User ID. Agency is responsible for any activity associated with its account. Agency shall be
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 58 of 64
responsible for obtaining and maintaining any equipment and ancillary services needed to
connect to, access or otherwise use the Services. Agency will, at its own expense, provide
assistance to Flock, including, but not limited to, by means of access to, and use of, Agency
facilities, as well as by means of assistance from Agency personnel to the limited extent any of
the foregoing may be reasonably necessary to enable Flock to perform its obligations hereunder,
including, without limitation, any obligations with respect to Support Services or any Installation
Services.
3.2 Agency Representations and Warranties. Agency represents, covenants, and warrants that
Agency will use the Services only in compliance with this Agreement and all applicable laws
and regulations, including but not limited to any laws relating to the recording or sharing of
video, photo, or audio content. Although Flock has no obligation to monitor Agency ’s use of
the Services, Flock may do so and may prohibit any use of the Services it believes may be (or
alleged to be) in violation of the foregoing.
4. CONFIDENTIALITY; AGENCY DATA
4.1 Confidentiality. To the extent allowable by applicable FOIA and state-specific Public
Records Acts, each Party (the “Receiving Party”) understands that the other Party (the
“Disclosing Party”) has disclosed or may disclose business, technical or financial information
relating to the Disclosing Party’s business (hereinafter referred to as “Proprietary Information”
of the Disclosing Party). Proprietary Information of Flock includes non-public information
regarding features, functionality and performance of the Services. Proprietary Information of
Agency includes non-public data provided by Agency to Flock or collected by Flock via the
Flock Hardware or Agency Hardware, to enable the provision of the Services, which includes
but is not limited to geolocation information and environmental data collected by sensors . The
Receiving Party agrees: (i) to take the same security precautions to protect against disclosure or
unauthorized use of such Proprietary Information that the Party takes with its own proprietary
information, but in no event will a Party apply less than reasonable precautions to protect such
Proprietary Information, and (ii) not to use (except in performance of the Services or as
otherwise permitted herein) or divulge to any third person any such Proprietary Information.
Flock’s use of the Proprietary Information may include processing the Proprietary Information to
send Agency alerts, or to analyze the data collected to identify motion or other events. The
Disclosing Party agrees that the foregoing shall not apply with respect to any information that the
Receiving Party can document (a) is or becomes generally available to the public, or (b) was in
its possession or known by it prior to receipt from the Disclosing Party, or (c) was rightfully
disclosed to it without restriction by a third party, or (d) was independently developed without
use of any Proprietary Information of the Disclosing Party. Nothing in this Agreement will
prevent the Receiving Party from disclosing the Proprietary Information pursuant to any judicial
or governmental order, provided that the Receiving Party gives the Disclosing Party reasonable
prior notice of such disclosure to contest such order. For clarity, Flock may access, use, preserve
and/or disclose the Footage to law enforcement authorities, government officials, and/or third
parties, if legally required to do so or if Flock has a good faith belief that such access, use,
preservation or disclosure is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with a legal process or request;
(b) enforce this Agreement, including investigation of any potential violation thereof; (c) detect,
prevent or otherwise address security, fraud or technical issues; or (d) protect the rights, property
or safety of Flock, its users, a third party, or the public as required or permitted by law, including
respond to an emergency situation. Flock may store deleted Footage in order to comply with
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 59 of 64
certain legal obligations, but such retained Footage will not be retrievable without a valid court
order.
4.2 Agency Data. As between Flock and Agency, all right, title and interest in the Agency Data,
belong to and are retained solely by Agency. Agency hereby grants to Flock a limited, non-
exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to (i) use the Agency Data and perform all acts with
respect to the Agency Data as may be necessary for Flock to provide the Flock Services to
Agency, including without limitation the Support Services set forth in Section 2.10 above, and a
non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, fully paid license to use,
reproduce, modify, display, and distribute the Agency Data as a part of the Aggregated Data, (ii)
disclose the Agency Data (both inclusive of any Footage) to enable law enforcement monitoring
for elected law enforcement Hotlists as well as provide Footage search access to law
enforcement for investigative purposes only, and (iii) and obtain Aggregated Data as set forth
below in Section 4.5. As between Agency and Non-Agency End Users that have prescribed
access of Footage to Agency, each of Agency and Non-Agency End Users will share all right,
title and interest in the Non-Agency End User Data. This Agreement does not by itself make any
Non-Agency End User Data the sole property or the Proprietary Information of Agency. Flock
will automatically delete Footage older than thirty (30) days. Agency has a thirty (30) day
window to view, save and/or transmit Footage to the relevant government agency prior to its
deletion. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Flock automatically deletes Wing Replay after seven
(7) days, during which time Agency may view, save and/or transmit such data to the relevant
government agency prior to deletion. Flock does not own and shall not sell Agency Data.
4.3 Agency Generated Data in Wing Suite. Parties understand that Flock does not own any
right, title, or interest to third-party video integrated into the Wing Suite. Flock may provide
Agency with the opportunity to post, upload, display, publish, distribute, transmit, broadcast, or
otherwise make available on or submit through the Wing Suite, messages, text, illustrations,
files, images, graphics, photos, comments, sounds, music, videos, information, content, ratings,
reviews, data, questions, suggestions, or other information or materials produced by Agency.
Agency shall retain whatever legally cognizable right, title, and interest that Agency has in
Agency Generated Data. Agency understands and acknowledges that Flock has no obligation to
monitor or enforce Agency’s intellectual property rights to Agency Generated Data. To the
extent legally permissible, Agency grants Flock a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable,
worldwide, royalty-free, fully paid license to use, reproduce, modify, display, and distribute the
Agency Generated Data for the sole purpose of providing Flock Services. Flock does not own
and shall not sell Agency Generated Data.
4.4 Feedback. If Agency provides any suggestions, ideas, enhancement requests, feedback,
recommendations or other information relating to the subject matter hereunder, Agency hereby
assigns (and will cause its agents and representatives to assign) to Flock all right, title and
interest (including intellectual property rights) with respect to or resulting from any of the
foregoing.
4.5 Aggregated Data. Flock shall have the right to collect, analyze, and anonymize Agency Data
and Agency Generated Data to create Aggregated Data to use and perform the Services and
related systems and technologies, including the training of machine learning algorithms. Agency
hereby grants Flock a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free right (during and after
the Term hereof) to use and distribute such Aggregated Data to improve and enhance the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 60 of 64
Services and for other development, diagnostic and corrective purposes, other Flock offerings,
and crime prevention efforts. Parties understand that the aforementioned license is required for
continuity of Services. No rights or licenses are granted except as expressly set forth herein.
Flock does not sell Aggregated Data
5. Reserved.
6. TERM AND TERMINATION.
6.1 Term. The initial term of this Agreement shall be for the period of time set forth on the
Order Form and shall commence at the time outlined in this section below (the “Term”).
Following the Term, unless otherwise indicated on the Order Form, this Agreement will
automatically renew for successive renewal terms of the greater of one year or the length set
forth on the Order Form (each, a “Renewal Term”) unless either Party gives the other Party
notice of non-renewal at least thirty (30) days prior to the end of the then-current term.
a. For Wing Suite products: the Term shall commence upon execution of this Agreement
and continue for one (1) year, after which, the Term may be extended by mutual consent
of the Parties, unless terminated by either Party.
b. For Falcon and Sparrow products: the Term shall commence upon first installation and
validation of Flock Hardware.
c. For Raven products: the Term shall commence upon first installation and validation of
Flock Hardware.
d. For Falcon Flex products: the Term shall commence upon execution of this Agreement.
e. For Advanced Search products: the Term shall commence upon execution of this
Agreement.
6.2 Termination for Convenience. At any time during the agreed upon Term, either Party may
terminate this Agreement for convenience. Termination for convenience of the Agreement by the
Agency will be effective immediately. Termination for convenience by Agency will result in a
one-time removal fee of $500 per Flock Hardware. Termination for convenience by Flock will
not result in any removal fees. Upon termination for convenience, a refund will be provided for
Flock Hardware, prorated for any fees for the remaining Term length set forth previously. Wing
Suite products and Advanced Search are not subject to refund for early termination. Flock will
provide advanced written notice and remove all Flock Hardware at Flock’s own convenience,
within a commercially reasonable period of time upon termination. Agency’s termination of this
Agreement for Flock’s material breach of this Agreement shall not be considered a termination
for convenience for the purposes of this Section 6.2.
6.3 Termination. Notwithstanding the termination provisions in Section 2.5.2, in the event of
any material breach of this Agreement, the non-breaching Party may terminate this Agreement
prior to the end of the Term by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice to the breaching Party;
provided, however, that this Agreement will not terminate if the breaching Party has cured the
breach prior to the expiration of such thirty (30) day period. Either Party may terminate this
Agreement, without notice, (i) upon the institution by or against the other Party of insolvency,
receivership or bankruptcy proceedings, (ii) upon the other Party's making an assignment for the
benefit of creditors, or (iii) upon the other Party's dissolution or ceasing to do business. Upon
termination for Flock’s material breach, Flock will refund to Agency a pro-rata portion of the
pre-paid fees for Services not received due to such termination.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 61 of 64
6.4 No-Fee Term. Flock will provide Agency with complimentary access to Hotlist alerts, as
further described in Section 4.2 (“No-Fee Term”). In the event a Non-Agency End User grants
Agency access to Footage and/or notifications from a Non-Agency End User, Agency will have
access to Non-Agency End User Footage and/or notifications until deletion, subject to a thirty
(30) day retention policy for all products except Wing Replay, which is subject to a seven (7) day
retention policy. Flock may, in their sole discretion, provide access or immediately terminate the
No-Fee Term. The No-Fee Term will survive the Term of this Agreement. Flock, in its sole
discretion, can determine to impose a price per No-Fee Term upon thirty (30) days’ notice to
Agency. Agency may terminate any No-Fee Term or access to future No-Fee Terms upon thirty
(30) days’ notice.
6.5 Survival. The following Sections will survive termination: 2.5, 2.6, 3, 4, 5, 6.4, 7.3, 7.4,
8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 9.1 and 9.6.
7. REMEDY; WARRANTY AND DISCLAIMER
7.1 Remedy. Upon a malfunction or failure of Flock Hardware or Embedded Software (a
“Defect”), Agency must notify Flock’s technical support as described in Section 2.10 above. If
Flock is unable to correct the Defect, Flock shall, or shall instruct one of its contractors to repair
or replace the Flock Hardware or Embedded Software suffering from the Defect. Flock reserves
the right in their sole discretion to refuse or delay replacement or its choice of remedy for a
Defect until after it has inspected and tested the affected Flock Hardware provided that such
inspection and test shall occur within a commercially reasonable time, but no longer than seven
(7) business days after Agency notifies the Flock of a known Defect. In the event of a Defect,
Flock will repair or replace the defective Flock Hardware at no additional cost to Agency.
Absent a Defect, in the event that Flock Hardware is lost, stolen, or damaged, Agency may
request that Flock replace the Flock Hardware at a fee according to the then-current Reinstall
policy (https://www.flocksafety.com/reinstall-fee-schedule). Agency shall not be required to
replace subsequently lost, damaged or stolen Flock Hardware, however, Agency understands and
agrees that functionality, including Footage, will be materially affected due to such subsequently
lost, damaged or stolen Flock Hardware and that Flock will have no liability to Agency regarding
such affected functionality nor shall the Usage Fee or Implementation Fees owed be impacted.
Flock is under no obligation to replace or repair Flock Hardware or Agency Hardware.
7.2 Exclusions. Flock will not provide the remedy described in Section 7.1 if Agency has
misused the Flock Hardware, Agency Hardware, or Service in any manner.
7.3 Warranty. Flock shall use reasonable efforts consistent with prevailing industry standards to
maintain the Services in a manner which minimizes errors and interruptions in the Services and
shall perform the Installation Services in a professional and workmanlike manner. Services may
be temporarily unavailable for scheduled maintenance or for unscheduled emergency
maintenance, either by Flock or by third-party providers, or because of other causes beyond
Flock’s reasonable control, but Flock shall use reasonable efforts to provide advance notice in
writing or by e-mail of any scheduled service disruption.
7.4 Disclaimer. THE REMEDY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 7.1 ABOVE IS AGENCY’S SOLE
REMEDY, AND FLOCK’S SOLE LIABILITY, WITH RESPECT TO DEFECTIVE
EMBEDDED SOFTWARE. FLOCK DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SERVICES WILL
BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE; NOR DOES IT MAKE ANY WARRANTY AS
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 62 of 64
TO THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE SERVICES. EXCEPT
AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION, THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS
IS” AND FLOCK DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING,
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. THIS
DISCLAIMER OF SECTION 7.4 ONLY APPLIES TO THE EXTENT ALLOWED BY THE
GOVERNING LAW OF THE STATE MENTIONED IN SECTION 9.6.
7.5 Insurance. Flock will maintain commercial general liability policies with policy limits
reasonably commensurate with the magnitude of Flock’s business risk. Certificates of Insurance
can be provided upon request.
7.6 Force Majeure. Parties are not responsible or liable for any delays or failures in
performance from any cause beyond their control, including, but not limited to acts of God,
changes to law or regulations, embargoes, war, terrorist acts, acts or omissions of third-Party
technology providers, riots, fires, earthquakes, floods, power blackouts, strikes, supply chain
shortages of equipment or supplies, weather conditions or acts of hackers, internet service
providers or any other third Party acts or omissions. Force Majeure includes the novel
coronavirus Covid-19 pandemic, and the potential spread of variants, which is ongoing as of the
date of the execution of this Agreement.
8. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY; NO FEE TERM; INDEMNITY
8.1 Limitation of Liability. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY,
FLOCK AND ITS SUPPLIERS (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL HARDWARE
AND TECHNOLOGY SUPPLIERS), OFFICERS, AFFILIATES, REPRESENTATIVES,
CONTRACTORS AND EMPLOYEES SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE WITH
RESPECT TO ANY SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT OR TERMS AND
CONDITIONS RELATED THERETO UNDER ANY CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, PRODUCT LIABILITY, OR OTHER THEORY: (A) FOR ERROR OR
INTERRUPTION OF USE OR FOR LOSS OR INACCURACY, INCOMPLETENESS OR
CORRUPTION OF DATA OR FOOTAGE OR COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE
GOODS, SERVICES OR TECHNOLOGY OR LOSS OF BUSINESS; (B) FOR ANY
INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES;
(C) FOR ANY MATTER BEYOND FLOCK’S ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OR REASONABLE
CONTROL INCLUDING REPEAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OR INABILITY TO CAPTURE
FOOTAGE OR IDENTIFY AND/OR CORRELATE A LICENSE PLATE WITH THE FBI
DATABASE; (D) FOR ANY PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
MADE IN GOOD FAITH; (E) FOR CRIME PREVENTION; OR (F) FOR ANY AMOUNTS
THAT, TOGETHER WITH AMOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH ALL OTHER CLAIMS,
EXCEED THE FEES PAID AND/OR PAYABLE BY AGENCY TO FLOCK FOR THE
SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IN THE TWELVE (12) MONTHS PRIOR TO THE
ACT OR OMISSION THAT GAVE RISE TO THE LIABILITY, IN EACH CASE, WHETHER
OR NOT FLOCK HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
THIS LIMITATION OF LIABILITY OF SECTION 8 ONLY APPLIES TO THE EXTENT
ALLOWED BY THE GOVERNING LAW OF THE STATE MENTIONED IN SECTION 9.6.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, THE LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY LIMIT SET
FORTH HEREIN SHALL NOT APPLY TO (1) DAMAGES CAUSED BY CONSULTANT'S
GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT, (2) CONSULTANT'S
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 63 of 64
OBLIGATIONS TO INDEMNIFY AND DEFEND CITY (3) CLAIMS OR GENERAL
DAMAGES THAT FALL WITHIN THE INSURANCE COVERAGE OF THIS
AGREEMENT, (4) STATUTORY DAMAGES, AND (5) WRONGFUL DEATH CAUSED BY
CONSULTANT.
8.2 Additional No-Fee Term Requirements. IN NO EVENT SHALL FLOCK’S
AGGREGATE LIABILITY, IF ANY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY RELATED TO
THE COMPLIMENTARY NO-FEE TERM AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.4 EXCEED
$100, WITHOUT REGARD TO WHETHER SUCH CLAIM IS BASED IN CONTRACT,
TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), PRODUCT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE. Parties
acknowledge and agree that the essential purpose of this Section 8.2 is to allocate the risks under
the No-Fee Term described in Section 6.4 and limit potential liability given the aforementioned
complimentary service, which would have been substantially higher if Flock were to assume any
further liability other than as set forth herein. Flock has relied on these limitations in
determining whether to provide the complementary No-Fee Term. The limitations set forth in
this Section 8.2 shall not apply to claims or damages resulting from Flock’s other obligations
under this Agreement.
8.3 Responsibility. Each Party to this Agreement shall assume the responsibility and liability for
the acts and omissions of its own employees, deputies, officers, or agents, in connection with the
performance of their official duties under this Agreement. Each Party to this Agreement shall be
liable (if at all) only for the torts of its own officers, agents, or employees.
9. Reserved.
10. MISCELLANEOUS
10.1 Compliance With Laws. The Agency agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and
federal laws, regulations, policies and ordinances and their associated record retention
schedules, including responding to any subpoena request(s). In the event Flock is legally
compelled to comply with a judicial order, subpoena, or government mandate, to disclose
Agency Data or Agency Generated Data, Flock will provide Agency with notice.
10.2 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found to be unenforceable or invalid,
that provision will be limited or eliminated to the minimum extent necessary so that this
Agreement will otherwise remain in full force and effect.
10.3 Assignment. This Agreement is not assignable, transferable or sublicensable by either
Party, without prior consent. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may assign this
Agreement, without the other Party's consent, (i) to any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate entity,
or (ii) to any purchaser of all or substantially all of such Party's assets or to any successor by
way of merger, consolidation or similar transaction
10.4 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with the Order Form(s), the then-current
Reinstall policy (https://www.flocksafety.com/reinstall-fee-schedule), Deployment Plan(s),
and any attached addenda are the complete and exclusive statement of the mutual
understanding of the Parties and supersedes and cancels all previous written and oral
agreements, communications and other understandings relating to the subject matter of this
Agreement, and that all waivers and modifications must be in a writing signed by both
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020 Page 64 of 64
Parties, except as otherwise provided herein. None of Agency’s purchase orders,
authorizations or similar documents will alter the terms of this Agreement, and any such
conflicting terms are expressly rejected. In the event of any conflict of terms found in this
Agreement or any other terms and conditions, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.
10.5 Relationship. No agency, partnership, joint venture, or employment is created as a result of
this Agreement and Agency does not have any authority of any kind to bind Flock in any
respect whatsoever. Flock shall at all times be and act as an independent contractor.
10.6 Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State in
which the Agency is located. The Parties hereto agree that venue would be proper in the
chosen courts of the State of which the Agency is located. The Parties agree that the United
Nations Convention for the International Sale of Goods is excluded in its entirety from this
Agreement.
10.7 Publicity. Upon prior consent from Agency, Flock has the right to reference and use
Agency’s name and trademarks and disclose the nature of the Services provided hereunder in
each case in business and development and marketing efforts, including without limitation on
Flock’s website.
10.8 Export. Agency may not remove or export from the United States or allow the export or re-
export of the Flock IP or anything related thereto, or any direct product thereof in violation of
any restrictions, laws or regulations of the United States Department of Commerce, the
United States Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control, or any other United
States or foreign agency or authority. As defined in Federal Acquisition Regulation
(“FAR”), section 2.101, the Services, the Flock Hardware and Documentation are
“commercial items” and according to the Department of Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation (“DFAR”) section 252.2277014(a)(1) and are deemed to be “commercial
computer software” and “commercial computer software documentation.” Flock is compliant
with FAR Section 889 and does not contract or do business with, use any equipment, system,
or service that uses the enumerated banned Chinese telecommunication companies,
equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical
technology as part of any Flock system. Consistent with DFAR section 227.7202 and FAR
section 12.212, any use, modification, reproduction, release, performance, display, or
disclosure of such commercial software or commercial software documentation by the U.S.
Government will be governed solely by the terms of this Agreement and will be prohibited
except to the extent expressly permitted by the terms of this Agreement.
10.9 Headings. The headings are merely for organization and should not be construed as adding
meaning to the Agreement or interpreting the associated sections.
10.10 Authority. Each of the below signers of this Agreement represent that they understand
this Agreement and have the authority to sign on behalf of and bind the Parties they are
representing.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 78022207-A8AC-434B-9092-A13B6992B6BE
Surveillance Use Policy for fixed Automated License Plate Recognition
(ALPR) Technology
In accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section PAMC 2.30.680(d), the Surveillance Use
Policy for the Police Department’s use of fixed ALPR technology is as follows:
1. Intended Purpose. The technology is used by the Palo Alto Police Department to
convert data associated with vehicle license plates and vehicle descriptions for official
law enforcement purposes, including but not limited to identifying stolen or wanted
vehicles, stolen license plates and missing persons, suspect interdiction and stolen
property recovery.
2. Authorized Uses. Department personnel may only access and use the ALPR system for
official and legitimate law enforcement purposes consistent with this Policy.
The following uses of the ALPR system are specifically prohibited:
a. Harassment or Intimidation: It is a violation of this Policy to use the ALPR system
to harass and/or intimidate any individual or group.
b. Personal Use: It is a violation of this Policy to use the ALPR system or
associated scan files or hot lists for any personal purpose.
c. First Amendment Rights. It is a violation of this policy to use the LPR system or
associated scan files or hot lists for the purpose or known effect of infringing
upon First Amendment rights of any person.
d. Invasion of Privacy: Except when done pursuant to a court order such as a
search warrant, is a violation of this Policy to utilize the ALPR to record license
plates except those of vehicles that are exposed to public view (e.g., vehicles on
a public road or street, or that are on private property but whose license plate(s)
are visible from a public road, street, or a place to which members of the public
have access, such as the parking lot of a shop or other business establishment).
3. Information Collected. A fixed ALPR system captures the date, time, location, license
plate (state, partial, paper, and no plate), and vehicle characteristics (make, model, type,
and color) of passing vehicles. using the Palo Alto Police Department’s ALPR’s system
and the vendor’s vehicle identification technology.
4. Safeguards. All data will be closely safeguarded and protected by both procedural and
technological means. The Palo Alto Police Department will observe the following
safeguards regarding access to and use of stored data (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil
Code § 1798.90.53):
a. All ALPR data shall be accessible only through a login/password-protected
system capable of documenting all access of information by name, date, and
time.
b. Persons approved to access ALPR data under this policy are permitted to access
the data for legitimate law enforcement purposes only, such as when the data
relate to a specific criminal investigation
c. Such ALPR data may only be released to other authorized and verified local
enforcement officials and agencies for legitimate law enforcement purposes.
d. Every ALPR system inquiry must be documented by either the associated case
number or incident number, and lawful reason for the inquiry.
5. Retention. The City’s ALPR vendor, Flock Safety, will store the data (data hosting) and
ensure proper maintenance and security of data stored in their data centers. Flock
Safety will purge the data 30 days after collection; however, this will not preclude Palo
Alto Police Department from maintaining any relevant vehicle data obtained from the
system after that period if it has become, or it is reasonable to believe it will become,
evidence in a specific criminal investigation or is subject to a discovery request or other
lawful action to produce records. In those circumstances the applicable data should be
downloaded from the server onto portable media and booked into evidence.
Information gathered or collected, and records retained by Flock Safety cameras will not
be sold, accessed, or used for any purpose other than legitimate law enforcement or
public safety purposes.
6. Access by non-City Entities. The ALPR data may be shared only with other local law
enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes or as
otherwise required by law, and as provided below:
a. Requests
i. A law enforcement agency may make a written request for specific data,
including the name of the agency and the intended official law
enforcement purpose for access
ii. The request shall be reviewed by the Chief of Police or the authorized
designee and approved before access is granted
iii. The approved request is retained on file
iv. Requests for ALPR data by non-law enforcement or non-prosecutorial
agencies will be processed by the Department’s custodian of records and
fulfilled only as required by law.
b. Memorandaphilip of Understanding
i. Access to searchable data by other local law enforcement agencies shall
only be granted pursuant to an MOU with that specific agency
ii. Such MOU will provide that access will only be used for legitimate law
enforcement or public safety purposes
c. The Chief of Police or the authorized designee will consider the California Values
Act (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.2 et seq), before
approving the access to ALPR data. The Palo Alto Police Department does not
permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City or its
contractors/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement.
7. Compliance Procedures. The Investigative Services Captain (or other police
administrator as designated by the Police Chief) shall be responsible for compliance with
the requirements of Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq. This includes, but is not limited to
(Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53):
a. Only properly trained sworn officers, crime analysts, and police staff are allowed
access to the ALPR system or to collect ALPR information.
b. Ensuring that training requirements are completed for authorized users.
c. ALPR system monitoring to ensure the security of the information and
compliance with applicable privacy laws.
d. Ensuring that procedures are followed for system operators and to maintain
records of in compliance with Civil Code § 1798.90.52.
e. The title and name of the current designee in overseeing the ALPR operation is
maintained. Continually working with the Custodian of Records on the retention
and destruction of ALPR data as required.
f. Ensuring this policy and related procedures are conspicuously posted on the
Department’s dedicated ALPR website.
It is the responsibility of the Investigative Services Captain (or other police administrator
as designated by the Police Chief) to ensure that an audit is conducted of ALPR
detection inquiries at least once during each calendar year. The Department will audit a
sampling of the ALPR system utilization from the prior 12-month period to verify proper
use in accordance with the above authorized uses. The audit shall randomly select at
least 10 detection browsing inquiries conducted by department employees during the
preceding six-month period and determine if each inquiry meets the requirements
established by policy. This audit shall take the form of an internal Department
memorandum to the Chief of Police. The memorandum shall include any data errors
found so that such errors can be corrected. After review by the Chief of Police, the
memorandum and any associated documentation shall be filed and retained by the
Department.
Making
SMart
DeciSionS
about
Surveillance
A Guide for Community
trAnspArenCy,
ACCountAbility
& oversiGht the ACLU
of CALiforniA
APriL 2016
urveillance is on the rise in our communities, but basic transparency, oversight, and
accountability remain the exception, not the rule. Police are spending billions of dollars on very
sophisticated and invasive surveillance technology from license plate readers and cell phone
trackers to facial recognition and drones. Too many of these programs are moving forward without
public conversation, careful consideration of the costs and benefits, or adequate policies in place to
prevent misuse and protect rights. As a result, surveillance may enable high-tech profiling,
perpetuate systems of abusive policing, and undermine trust in law enforcement, particularly in
communities of color where police misconduct has been rampant and community relationships have
been strained. It’s time for change.
Communities must be equal partners in any decision about the use of surveillance technology. They
need to know when and why surveillance is being considered, what it is intended to do, and what it
will really cost — both in dollars and in individual rights. They need to be certain that any proposal
includes strong mechanisms for transparency, accountability, and oversight. Otherwise, public trust
can be easily damaged, and communities can end up saddled with systems that are too invasive, very
expensive, and much less effective at accomplishing community safety goals than initially imagined.
This guide provides a step-by-step framework to approach surveillance proposals, properly evaluate
their true costs, and develop policies that provide transparency, oversight, and accountability. Its
checklist walks community members, policymakers, and law enforcement officials through essential
questions to ask and answer about surveillance proposals, and includes dozens of case studies
highlighting smart approaches and missteps to avoid. The guide concludes with model language for
policymakers to adopt to make sure the right process is used every time a surveillance proposal is
considered.
We hope you will find this document and its supporting materials (available online at
aclunc.org/smartaboutsurveillance) useful in ensuring your community is making informed
decisions about surveillance.
Nicole A. Ozer Peter Bibring
Technology and Civil Liberties Policy Director Police Practices Director
ACLU of California ACLU of California
S
1
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
Authors: Chris Conley, Matt Cagle, Peter Bibring, Jessica Farris,
Linda Lye, Mitra Ebadolahi, and Nicole Ozer, ACLU of California
Contributing Writers: Addison Litton and Thomas Mann Miller
Design & Layout: Gigi Pandian & Daniela Bernstein
This publication was underwritten with support from the ACLU Foundation
and the ACLU’s generous members and donors.
PUBLISHED BY THE ACLU OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND EDITION — APRIL 2016
CONTENTS
Technology Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Key Questions to Answer Before Moving Forward with Any Surveillance Proposal .......................... 3
Why It Matters: The Costs and Consequences of Surveillance ................................................................. 4
Surveillance Impacts Civil Rights and Community Trust ................................................................................ 4
Surveillance Carries Both Immediate and Ongoing Financial Costs ............................................................. 7
Surveillance Must Take Evolving Privacy Law into Account ......................................................................... 8
Necessary Steps when Considering a Surveillance Proposal ................................................................... 11
Collectively Evaluate the Effectiveness, Costs and Alternatives Before Making Decisions
about Surveillance ................................................................................................................................................. 11
Establish a Surveillance Use Policy to Mitigate Harms and Protect Rights ................................................ 17
Ensure Accountability by Enforcing Policies and Encouraging Ongoing Public Engagement .............. 21
Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................ 24
Appendix: Model Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance ............................................................ 25
Endnotes ................................................................................................................................................................... 29
2
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
3
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
4
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
Why It Matters: The Costs and Consequences of Surveillance
Surveillance technology is often proposed as an efficient public safety tool. But too often, proposals ignore
not only the true financial costs of surveillance technology but also their potential to infringe on civil rights
and undermine public trust and effective policing. Communities should identify and assess all of the harms
and costs of surveillance as early in the consideration process as possible in order to determine whether
moving forward with a surveillance technology is really the right choice.
A. SURVEILLANCE IMPACTS CIVIL RIGHTS AND COMMUNITY TRUST
The community at large can pay a heavy price if
surveillance technology is acquired and deployed
without evaluating its impact on civil rights and its
potential for misuse. Surveillance can easily intrude
upon the individual rights of residents and visitors,
perpetuate discriminatory policing, or chill freedom of
expression, association, and religion — freedoms that
public officials are sworn to protect.1 As a result,
surveillance can erode trust in law enforcement, making
it harder for officers and community members to work
together to keep the community safe.2
1. SURVEILLANCE CAN INTRUDE UPON COMMUNITY
MEMBERS’ RIGHTS
The greatest cost of surveillance technology may not be financial but personal: the invasion and infringement
of civil rights. Various types of surveillance technology are capable of capturing and storing vast amounts of
information about community members and visitors: the political rallies and religious services they attend, the
health services they use, the romantic partners they have, and more. Just the perceived threat of surveillance
has the potential to harm community members by discouraging individuals from participating in political
advocacy, opposing police misconduct, evaluating reproductive choices, exploring their sexuality, and
engaging in other activities that are clearly protected by the federal and California constitutions. And, too
often, this perception is grounded in reality, as demonstrated by Fresno’s use of social media monitoring
software that flagged “#blacklivesmatter” as an indicator of criminal activity.34
There are many examples of the misuse of surveillance to target individuals based on their race, ethnicity,
associations, or religious or political activities. Police in Santa Clara used a GPS device to track a student due
to his father’s association with the local Muslim Community Association.5 Police in Michigan sought
“information on all the cell phones that were congregating in an area where a labor-union protest was
expected.”6 The NSA specifically monitored the email of several prominent Muslim-Americans with no
evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing.7 In Britain, where video surveillance is pervasive, a European Parliament
“[S]urveillance programs follow a long
history of law enforcement targeting African
American and other minority groups…. We
need … a future in the city where our police
department and other public institutions
have true community oversight and
accountability.”
The Rev. B.T. Lewis and Taymah Jahsi,
Organizers, Faith in Community in Fresno2
Civil Rights Principles in an Era of Big Data, signed by fourteen of the nation’s leading civil and human
rights groups, sounds the alarm on how surveillance technology often disproportionately affects
communities of color and religious and ethnic minorities. It calls for technology to be “designed and
used in ways that respect the values of equal opportunity and equal justice” and urges users to “stop
high‐tech profiling” and “preserve constitutional principles.” The document further calls for search
warrants and other independent oversight of law enforcement and “clear limitations and robust
audit mechanisms to make sure that if these tools are used it is in a responsible and equitable way.”4
5
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
study showed that “the young, the male and the black were systematically and disproportionately targeted not
because of their involvement in crime or disorder, but for ‘no obvious reason.’”8
Surveillance programs that do not focus on individual targets can be particularly problematic. Tracking entire
groups or communities extends “guilt by association” to those who have done nothing wrong, discourages
participation in local activities, and alienates community members. And once members of the group are
tainted with such suspicion, it becomes easy to justify prying into their private lives, or even threatening them
with further consequences if they do not cooperate with additional surveillance efforts.9 101112
SURVEILLANCE OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ACTIVISTS
The government has a long and troubled history of abusing surveillance powers to target political and
social activists. From the “Red Squads” of the early 20th century to the FBI’s efforts to infiltrate and
discredit antiwar and civil rights activists in the 1960s, to recent surveillance of the Black Lives Matter
movement:
The Department of Homeland Security monitored the social media accounts of Black Lives
Matter members and collected details about the locations of members and plans for peaceful
protests in Ferguson, Baltimore, and New York City. This led many to question why the DHS —
formed to combat terrorism — was surveilling members of a peaceful domestic social justice
movement.10
Police in Fresno, California, secretly acquired and tested multiple social media surveillance
tools that encouraged surveillance of hashtags like #BlackLivesMatter, #dontshoot, and
#wewantjustice and assigned individuals a “threat level.” This led to nationwide negative press
attention and calls for reform from community members, all of which forced the police chief
to issue a public apology.11
Authorities in the Oregon Department of Justice came under fire when it was revealed that a
senior investigator had used software to conduct surveillance of hashtags including
#BlackLivesMatter, which returned results for civil rights advocates, including the president of
the Urban League of Portland. The story triggered a public apology by Oregon’s Attorney
General and led to an internal investigation.12
Intelligence reforms born from lawsuits and congressional inquiries have led many law enforcement
agencies to bar the collection of information about political activism and other First Amendment‐
protected activities without a justifiable suspicion of criminal activity. But surveillance of Black Lives
Matter demonstrates a need for similar restrictions on the use of surveillance technology today to
ensure that it is not used to chill or undermine political and social activism.
6
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
“Dragnet” surveillance often targets communities of color:
for example, in Oakland, the police have
disproportionately used license plate readers in African-
American and Latino neighborhoods.13 In Compton,
police flew a plane rigged with high-powered surveillance
cameras overhead for weeks without the public’s
knowledge or consent.14 Because it involves collecting vast
amounts of information, dragnet surveillance also creates
the potential for all sorts of abuse, from NSA analysts
tracking romantic partners15 to a Washington, D.C. police
lieutenant blackmailing patrons of a gay bar.1617 18
Surveillance carries privacy and free speech threats even if it is conducted solely in public places. This is
particularly true when surveillance information is aggregated to build a robust data profile that can “reveal
much more in combination than any isolated record.”19
As Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has noted,
“a precise, comprehensive record of a person’s public
movements … reflects a wealth of detail about her
familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual
associations.” In addition, “[a]wareness that the
Government may be watching chills associational and
expressive freedoms.”20
2. SURVEILLANCE CAN ERODE TRUST IN LAW ENFORCEMENT
When law enforcement fails to fully engage with community members about the impact of surveillance — or,
worse, entirely skirts the democratic process by acquiring and deploying surveillance technology without
public discussion at all — it erodes trust even further, making it even harder for law enforcement officers to
work with the community to solve crimes and protect public safety.
In the years after the September 11th attacks, the New York Police Department created a secretive
intelligence wing that infiltrated Muslim neighborhoods with undercover officers, where they monitored the
daily lives of and compiled dossiers about Muslim-Americans engaging in constitutionally protected activities
in cafes, bookstores, and private residences with no
evidence of illegal activity.21 22These activities gravely
harmed the community’s trust in law enforcement and led
to a multi-year lawsuit and settlement that barred the
NYPD from conducting investigations on the basis of race,
religion, or ethnicity, and mandated implementation of a
series of reforms designed to deter warrantless surveillance.
In Compton, news broke about an aerial surveillance
program that watched the whole community and was
intentionally kept “hush-hush” by the Sheriff’s Department
to deter civil rights complaints. Both citizens and lawmakers were up in arms that they had been kept in the
dark about such intrusive surveillance. Angry community members rightly questioned, "Why are we the
target? As citizens we deserve [to know]. We are not all criminals.... It's an invasion of privacy.” The Mayor
called for a “citizen private protection policy,” ensuring that the community would be notified before any
new surveillance equipment was deployed or used.23
“One of the most alarming parts of that
history has been the ways that surveillance
has been misused against Black people
who have been advocating for their
justice. It’s been used to discredit, abuse,
and incarcerate.”
Opal Tometi, Black Lives Matter co‐
founder17
"Those of us from marginalized communities
grew up in environments very much shaped
by surveillance, which has been utilized to
ramp up the criminal justice system and
increase deportations….”
Steven Renderos, Center for Media Justice18
“The effects of surveillance on New York
Muslim communities have been
devastating.… Community members’ ties
to local police precincts have
deteriorated due to distrust and fear.”
Hina Shamsi, ACLU National Security
Project Director22
7
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
B. SURVEILLANCE CARRIES BOTH IMMEDIATE AND ONGOING FINANCIAL COSTS
In addition to the costs to civil rights and civil liberties, the fiscal impact of surveillance can be extensive.
Modifying current infrastructure, operating and maintaining systems, and training staff can consume limited
time and money, even if federal or state grants fund initial costs. Surveillance technologies may also fail or be
misused, resulting in costly lawsuits. To calculate the full financial cost of surveillance technology,
communities must look beyond the initial sticker price. 24
1. SURVEILLANCE REQUIRES INFRASTRUCTURE, STAFFING, TRAINING, AND MAINTENANCE
The hidden costs of infrastructure, training and staffing, operations and maintenance, and the potential for
budget overruns, can dwarf the cost of acquiring surveillance technology in the first place. Communities that
have failed to accurately estimate the full financial cost of a surveillance system have dealt with massive cost
overruns and programs that failed to accomplish their stated purpose. For example, Philadelphia planned to
spend $651,672 for a video surveillance program featuring 216
cameras. Instead, it spent $13.9 million on the project and
wound up with only 102 functional cameras after a year, a
result the city controller described as “exceedingly alarming,
and outright excessive — especially when $13.9 million is
equivalent to the cost of putting 200 new police recruits on our
streets.”25 To avoid a similar incident in your community, it is
essential to identify all of the costs required to install, use, and
maintain surveillance technology before making a decision
about whether to do so.
2. SURVEILLANCE CAN CREATE FINANCIAL RISKS INCLUDING LITIGATION AND DATA BREACH
Surveillance programs that fail to include proper safeguards to prevent errors or misuse and protect freedom
of expression, association, and religion, or that inadequately enforce such safeguards, can lead to expensive
litigation that diverts resources from other public services. For example, Muslim residents in Orange County
filed a discrimination lawsuit when it was revealed that state agents were sending informants into mosques to
collect information on the identities and activities of
worshippers.26 The NYPD paid $2 million in attorney fees for
spying on New York’s Muslim communities.27 Even technical
glitches can create the potential for costly lawsuits and other
expenses: the City of San Francisco was embroiled in a multi-
year civil rights lawsuit after wrongly pulling over, handcuffing,
and holding at gunpoint an innocent woman due to an error by
its ALPR system.28 29
The collection of surveillance data also creates the risk of data
breaches that can incur significant public costs as well as endanger residents’ privacy and economic security.
Even following best practices (which itself can entail significant expense) is not enough to prevent every
breach. California law requires that a local agency notify residents about a security breach.30 And the fiscal
costs of a breach of sensitive surveillance data could be very high: a 2015 report found that companies spent
an average of $3.7 million to resolve a data security breach.31 The more information your community collects
and retains, the greater the risk and potential cost of a breach.
“When you’re considering a new
technology, it’s important to evaluate
not only the upfront costs but also the
costs of maintenance and upgrades
that will occur down the road.”
Captain Michael Grinstead, Newport
News (VA) Police Department24
“After public backlash about Oakland’s
proposed Domain Awareness Center,
we really had to regroup and think about
how we needed to proceed.”
Renee Domingo, former Oakland
Emergency Services Coordinator29
8
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
3. LACK OF PROPER PROCESS CAN WASTE TIME AND MONEY
Failing to thoroughly discuss surveillance proposals and listen
to community concerns early in the process can result in
massive backlash and wasted time and funds when plans are
suspended or ultimately cancelled. Oakland was forced to scrap
most of the planning for its ill-fated Domain Awareness Center
and scale the project back considerably after community
members protested the misleading mission statement and lack
of transparency for the project.32 In Santa Clara County, a
secretive process to purchase a Stingray cell surveillance device
was derailed by the County Executive after it sidestepped
necessary community debate and county oversight.33 34
Community members grounded San Jose’s secret drone
purchase and the police were forced to apologize for the lack of transparency and community input.35
Engaging with the community before taking steps to go forward with a surveillance proposal is essential to
avoiding similar mistakes that spark widepsread community outrage and waste time and resources.
C. SURVEILLANCE MUST TAKE EVOLVING PRIVACY LAW INTO ACCOUNT
The use of surveillance technology is facing increased scrutiny and limits. Courts and lawmakers at the state
and federal level, driven by increased public concern about privacy, are acting to protect individual rights and
civil liberties. As a result, your community needs to consider both the existing laws and the potential for legal
change, including the policy and individual rights concerns that are driving that change, when evaluating a
surveillance proposal. 36
In recent years, federal courts have repeatedly reinforced legal protections for individual rights in the context
of today’s technology. In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously told law enforcement to “get a warrant”
to search an arrestee’s cell phone. In another unanimous decision, the Court also ruled a warrant is required
to use a GPS beeper to track a suspect’s vehicle, with a
majority of the Court suggesting that using technology to
track an individual’s location — even in public — over an
extended period of time triggers constitutional scrutiny.37
Finally, multiple federal courts declared the NSA’s
warrantless collection of telephone metadata unlawful, with
one criticizing its “almost Orwellian” scope.38 Surveillance
programs that fail to account for this trend may well be
held unconstitutional, and criminal investigations based on
evidence from those programs could be jeopardized.
The California Constitution is even more protective of community members’ privacy, including in public
spaces. The state right to privacy expressly gives Californians a legal and enforceable “right to be left alone”
that protects interests in privacy beyond the home.39 The California Supreme Court has held that covertly
“infiltrating” and monitoring the activities of students and professors at classes and public meetings without
any indication of criminal activity violated the California Constitution,40 as did warrantless aerial surveillance
of a resident’s backyard.41 Californians’ right to free expression also extends outside of the home, even to
privately owned areas like shopping centers.42
Numerous laws and regulations also place limits or requirements on the use of surveillance technology. The
federal Wiretap Act and its California counterpart limit the use of surveillance technology capable of
“The fact that technology now allows an
individual to carry such information in
his hand does not make the information
any less worthy of the protection for
which the Founders fought.”
Riley v. California, U.S. Supreme Court36
“SJPD should have done a better job
of communicating the purpose and
acquisition of the UAS (Unmanned
Aerial System) device to our
community….The community should
have the opportunity to provide
feedback, ask questions, and express
their concerns before we move
forward with this project.”
San Jose Police Department34
9
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
intercepting the contents of live communications. And in 2015, California lawmakers enacted three separate
laws that specifically address issues related to surveillance technology:
Collection of Electronic Information: The California Electronic Communications Privacy Act
requires a search warrant when collecting electronic information with surveillance technology like cell
phone tracking technology. It also requires a warrant for searching electronic devices or compelling
email, location information, or other metadata from service providers. The law creates additional
procedural safeguards, including notice to the suspect, and allows for suppression or court-mandated
deletion of information obtained or retained in violation of the law.43
Automated License Plate Readers: Newly enacted California law requires an opportunity for
public comment, a written, publicly available use policy that is “consistent with respect for an
individual’s privacy and civil liberties,” and reasonable security safeguards for any use of automated
license plate readers. Individuals can sue for harms due to a security breach or other unauthorized
disclosures.44
Cell Phone Tracking Technology: Newly enacted California law requires public process, local
legislative approval for all agencies other than sheriffs, a public use and privacy policy that is
“consistent with respect for an individual’s privacy and civil liberties,” and the disclosure of
agreements with other agencies concerning the use of IMSI catchers and other cell phone tracking
technology. The law also allows an individual to sue an agency for violating these provisions.45
There have also been bipartisan legal changes at both the federal and state level to rein in surveillance. In
2016, federal lawmakers adopted reforms related to NSA spying.46 Eighteen other states have enacted laws
restricting law enforcement access to location information,47 and a majority of states have introduced
legislation aimed at curbing the use of drones for surveillance purposes.4849
These state and federal changes are driven by a clear shift in public attitudes towards surveillance. Community
members want and expect reform at both the state and local level to increase transparency, accountability,
and oversight for surveillance technology. Two thirds of California voters want to see local elected officials
like City Councilmembers or County Supervisors approve new surveillance technologies before they can be
used. Similarly, a strong majority of voters want to see both local (65 percent) and state (64 percent) policies
SURVEY OF LIKELY 2016 CALIFORNIA VOTERS FINDS STRONG SUPPORT FOR REFORMS
TO SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY USE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT
Likely 2016 voters polled in a California statewide survey strongly favor local and state level reforms of
law enforcement surveillance technology practices.49 A summary of key findings from the survey:
Reform Proposal Support
Require the local City Council or Board of Supervisors to vote to approve
new surveillance technology before it is used by local police. 67%
Develop and enforce local policies to set limits on surveillance technology
used by police. 65%
Develop and enforce statewide policies to set limits on surveillance
technology used by police. 64%
Require law enforcement agencies to publicly report how often they are
using surveillance. 62%
Provide public notification prior to local police buying new technology for
surveillance. 58%
10
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
developed and enforced that set limits on police use of surveillance technology. Voters also want to see steps
taken to require public reporting from law enforcement agencies regarding the frequency of use of
surveillance technologies (62 percent) as well as public notification before the purchase of any new
surveillance technologies (58 percent).50 51
All of these factors have led many communities to move
forward with local ordinances that ensure transparency,
accountability, and oversight for all surveillance
technologies.52 Your community should follow their lead
and thoroughly evaluate any surveillance proposal in
order to protect the rights of your community members,
identify hidden costs and financial risks, and ensure that
you comply with existing laws and are consistent with
increasing public concerns about privacy.
“With a surveillance equipment ordinance,
any of the existing equipment that Oakland
might already have or any that is soon to
come out will have to go through the
vetting process.”
Brian Hofer, Chair, Oakland Domain
Awareness Center Privacy Committee51
ENACT A SURVEILLANCE & COMMUNITY SAFETY ORDINANCE
TO MAKE SURE THE RIGHT PROCESS IS FOLLOWED EVERY TIME
Passing the Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance included in the Appendix to this guide will
help your community avoid problems down the line by following the right process every time. It
ensures that there is community analysis of surveillance technology whenever it is considered, that
local lawmakers approve each step, and that any surveillance program that is approved includes both
a Surveillance Use Policy that safeguards individual rights and transparency and accountability
mechanisms to ensure that the Policy is followed.
11
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
Necessary Steps when Considering a Surveillance Proposal
Surveillance can be misused in ways that harm community members, undermine public safety goals, and
saddle taxpayers with unnecessary costs. That’s why it is essential to publicly and thoroughly evaluate
surveillance proposals. The following section will help your community — including diverse residents, public
officials, and law enforcement — work together to determine whether surveillance really makes sense and put
in place robust rules to ensure proper use, oversight, and accountability if your community decides to move
forward with a surveillance proposal. 53
A. COLLECTIVELY EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS, COSTS AND ALTERNATIVES BEFORE
MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE
Surveillance should only be a means to an end, never an end in itself. That means that your community
should have an actual purpose in mind or problem that needs to be addressed before even considering
surveillance technology. Once you have that, you can collectively evaluate whether surveillance is likely to
effectively accomplish your goals, as well as estimate the costs to both
your community’s budget and to individual rights.
1. DECIDE AS A COMMUNITY: INVOLVE THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY
FROM THE START
The best way to consider whether surveillance is the right choice and
to avoid costly mistakes is to engage the entire community —
including law enforcement, local lawmakers, and members of the
public — in a thorough discussion about any surveillance proposal.
Different segments of your community are likely to bring valuable perspectives to the process of evaluating
whether to acquire and use surveillance technology. And the time to engage with your community is at the
very beginning of the process, before any funding is sought, technology is acquired, or system is used.54
Several cities considering proposals to introduce or
expand surveillance have found it useful to actively
engage community members through working
groups and ad-hoc committees to shape policy and
provide oversight. The Redlands Police
Department convened a Citizens’ Privacy Council,
open to any city resident of the city, to provide
advice on surveillance-camera policies and oversee
police use of the cameras.55 Richmond formed an56
ad-hoc committee to evaluate policies for its video
“The public debate that the surveillance ordinance
will require on new technologies and their uses will
be beneficial for everyone, including city officials,
to help them learn more about how these
programs work and what they mean to the public.”
Joe DeVries, Oakland Assistant to the City
Administrator56
Fewer than 15 percent of
California communities publicly
debated surveillance programs
before moving forward. (ACLU
2014)54
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Privacy Office and Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
issued CCTV: Developing Privacy Best Practices, a report that encourages government agencies to build
privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties considerations into the design, acquisition, and operations of
video surveillance systems. An appendix highlights the need to follow the Fair Information Practice
Principles of Transparency, Individual Participation, Purpose Specification, Data Minimization, Use
Limitation, Data Quality and Integrity, Security, Accountability, and Auditing.53
12
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
surveillance program.57 And in 2014, following community
backlash and the vote not to expand Oakland’s Domain
Awareness Center, the City Council created a Privacy and Data
Retention Ad Hoc Advisory Committee comprised of diverse
community members to create safeguards to protect privacy58
rights and prevent the misuse of data for a scaled-back system to
be used at the Port of Oakland.59 Oakland now has a formal
Privacy Commission, which will provide advice to the City of Oakland on best practices to protect privacy
rights in connection with the City's purchase and use of surveillance equipment and other technology that
collects or stores data.60
Is the community engaged in an informed debate about any surveillance proposal?
It is never too early for a public debate about a surveillance proposal. Community members should know
what kind of surveillance is being considered, what it is intended to do and how it will affect them at the
earliest stages of the process, when their input can bring out important information, highlight community
concerns, and help avoid unforeseen problems and community backlash. 61
The public should be given effective notice that surveillance is being considered. Effective notice means
more than a line item in a public meeting agenda. Law enforcement should proactively contact
community groups, including those representing ethnic and religious communities, and local media to
increase public awareness early in the process and engage the entire community with the issue. 62
“Technology can only serve
democracy to the degree that it is
democratized.”
Malkia Cyril, Director, Center for
Media Justice58
CASE STUDY: SANTA CLARA COUNTY CANCELS STINGRAY BUY DUE TO
TRANSPARENCY CONCERNS
In 2015, the Santa Clara County Executive rejected the Sheriff’s proposal to purchase a Stingray
after the Board of Supervisors questioned the expense and secrecy of the project. The Board
questioned how they could be asked to spend more than $500,000 of taxpayer money to approve
a purchase that was shrouded in secrecy even from the Board itself. The County Executive
ultimately rejected the purchase because the company providing the Stingray refused to “agree to
even the most basic criteria we have in terms of being responsive to public records requests… We
had to do what we thought was right.”61
CASE STUDY: OAKLAND’S “DOMAIN AWARENESS CENTER” FORCED TO SCALE BACK
AFTER KEEPING COMMUNITY IN THE DARK
In 2013, the City of Oakland tried to expand its “Domain Awareness Center,” originally focused on
the Port of Oakland, into a citywide surveillance network linking together video cameras from local
streets and schools, traffic cameras, and gunshot microphones. Instead of soliciting early public
input about the expanded system, Oakland tried to move forward without any meaningful
engagement with the community. Residents were outraged, and the City Council voted against
expanding the system.62
13
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
An informed debate also requires that your63
community have access to a wide range of
information in order to assess how surveillance
would work in practice and whether it would advance
local goals. Community meetings with various
speakers representing different perspectives (not just
law enforcement and the technology vendor) can
help the community understand how the surveillance
technology actually works and its potential
implications. The entity seeking to acquire new
surveillance technology should also prepare and
release a Surveillance Impact Report and a
Surveillance Use Policy to help everyone understand how a technology will work, its potential costs, and
the safeguards that will prevent its misuse if the proposal were approved. Your community may also
consider convening an ad-hoc committee of local residents, experts and advocates who can work
together to make recommendations or help complete these documents.64
“It is critical to our judicial system and our
democracy that the public and our elected
representatives be informed about the use
of these devices so that we can have a
discussion about their privacy implications
and make informed decisions about policies
for their use.”
Joe Simitian, Santa Clara County
Supervisor63
USE A SURVEILLANCE IMPACT REPORT TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION
The scope and potential costs of a surveillance technology should be assessed and made available to
the community through a Surveillance Impact Report. This report should include:
o Information describing the technology, how it works, and what it collects, including
technology specification sheets from manufacturers;
o The proposed purposes(s) for the surveillance technology;
o The location(s) it will be deployed and crime statistics for any location(s);
o An assessment identifying any potential impact on civil liberties and civil rights and discussing
any plans to safeguard the rights of the public; and
o The fiscal costs for the surveillance technology, including initial purchase, personnel and other
ongoing costs, and any current or potential sources of funding.
A worksheet to help your community prepare a Surveillance Impact Report is available at
aclunc.org/smartaboutsurveillance.
CASE STUDY: SANTA CRUZ COUNCILMEMBERS LACK INFORMATION FOR ALPR
DECISION
After the Santa Cruz City Council approved the use of federal funds to purchase ALPRs for the police
department, councilmembers noted that they did not have a lot of information about the
technology or its impact on the community at the time of its decision. When one councilmember
was asked what effect the scanners might have on community members, he replied, “I don’t know
enough about the technology.” Another was unaware of privacy issues, admitting, “The council
didn’t get much correspondence about the potential for the erosion of civil rights that these kinds
of devices can cause....”64
14
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
How will the community decide whether to proceed with a surveillance proposal?
Community members deserve more than just information about surveillance proposals: they need the
opportunity to help determine whether the proposal actually benefits the community and how or whether
it should move forward, either by giving input to local policymakers at public hearings or by casting their
own ballot on the issue.
In either case, initial community approval should be obtained before any steps towards acquiring
surveillance technology are taken, including applying for funding from outside entities. This ensures that
external grants do not circumvent the proper democratic process and cut community members out of the
loop. Local policymakers or the community as a whole should be given additional opportunities to weigh
in if the proposal changes or as more details become available.65
2. DEFINE THE PURPOSE: ASK HOW AND WHETHER THIS TECHNOLOGY WILL AID YOUR COMMUNITY
Your community cannot determine whether surveillance is an appropriate solution if you have not first
identified the problem. Defining the specific purpose or issues that surveillance is intended to address is
essential to evaluate the likely effectiveness of surveillance and to identify alternatives that might provide a
better fit for your community’s needs and budget. It can help highlight the individuals or communities who
are likely to be most impacted by surveillance and ensure that their thoughts and concerns are fully
understood. It also provides a starting point for crafting a Surveillance Use Policy by defining specific
objectives for which surveillance is appropriate and barring its use outside of those purposes.
What specific community purposes will be aided by adopting this technology?
A well-defined community purpose should include a specific problem and a measurable outcome that the
community desires. Vague purposes such as “protecting our city from criminals” make it difficult for the
community to understand how surveillance might be used or how its effectiveness might be measured. In
contrast, a purpose such as “increase recovery of stolen vehicles” succinctly identifies an outcome desired
by community members and helps frame public discussion. That discussion may in turn lead you to
narrow or alter the purposes for which surveillance should be used, if you decide to use it at all. 66
CASE STUDY: OAKLAND SPENDS $2M ON “HARDLY USED” POLICE TECHNOLOGY
The cash‐strapped city of Oakland learned the hard way that acquiring new police technology
without a clearly defined purpose can be a waste of time and money. A city audit revealed that the
city had squandered almost $2 million on hardly used police technology between 2006 and 2011.
The auditor recommended steps to ensure that technology purchases were intended to fulfill
specific strategic objectives and regular evaluation of their effectiveness.66
CASE STUDY: SAN JOSE’S DRONE GROUNDED UNTIL COMMUNITY APPROVES
San Jose residents were outraged when they learned that their police department had purchased
a drone without any public debate. Amid critical media coverage and protests from community
groups, civil‐rights advocates, and local residents, police apologized and said they would ground
the drone until they could conduct adequate public outreach.65
15
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
Will this surveillance technology help your community achieve that purpose?
After your community identifies the purposes that surveillance technology might be able to address, you
should evaluate whether the proposed technology would actually achieve them. Manufacturer’s claims
should not be taken at face value, and certainly not in isolation. Instead, your community should look at
all of the evidence or arguments suggesting that surveillance will or will not effectively help you achieve
your defined purpose.67
Are there better alternatives to achieve your purpose?
Even if the proposed surveillance technology does seem likely to help your community achieve its
purpose, there still may be alternatives that are just as (or more) effective, less expensive, and/or less
likely to be misused or otherwise negatively impact your community members.
In particular, you should compare the effectiveness and costs of technology-based solutions with non-
technology-oriented approaches to address the problem. For example, multiple studies have shown that
traditional approaches such as increased lighting and foot patrols significantly reduce crime.68 You should
not automatically assume that surveillance technology will be more effective.69
3. IDENTIFY THE COSTS AND RISKS: EXAMINE FINANCIAL, LEGAL, AND PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES
Even if a specific technology is appropriate for your community’s purposes, there still may be financial, legal
and practical concerns that may make adopting it undesirable. This section will help you measure the likely
costs of surveillance so that you can determine whether they are truly outweighed by the expected benefits.
CASE STUDY: CITIES REPLACE RED LIGHT CAMERAS WITH LONGER YELLOW LIGHTS
California cities are increasingly shutting down red light cameras as evidence mounts that the
cameras increase, rather than decrease, traffic accidents. For example, in Walnut, CA, a study
found that red light cameras resulted in dramatic increases in “red light running collisions” (400%),
“rear end collisions” (71%) and “broadside collisions” (100%)” and that “no argument can be made
that photo enforcement has improved safety . . . within the city of Walnut. In fact, the use of red
light cameras appears to have decreased safety and put roadway users at increased risk.” In light
of this evidence, more than half of the California cities that once used red light cameras have ended
their programs, turning instead to alternatives that have proven more effective at preventing
accidents such as longer yellow lights at dangerous intersections.69
CASE STUDY: SAN FRANCISCO RECONSIDERS PLANS TO EXPAND
SAFETY CAMERA PROGRAM THAT FAILS TO IMPROVE COMMUNITY SAFETY
In 2005, San Francisco set out to deter violent crime and provide police with an investigative tool
by installing video cameras in the City’s high‐crime, high‐traffic areas. However, post‐installation
crime statistics published by mandate under a city ordinance revealed that the cameras neither
reduced crime nor assisted in solving them in any meaningful way. In fact, the cameras only led to
six suspects being charged by the SFPD between 2005 and 2008. As a result, the Police Commission
reconsidered its plans to expand the program.67
16
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
How much will the technology cost your community to acquire and operate?
Deciding how to allocate funds is one of your
community’s most important tasks. Every dollar
your community spends on surveillance
technology is a dollar it cannot spend on some
other community need. Costs related to
surveillance technology will include personnel
time, training costs, maintenance and upkeep, as
well as any network and storage costs for the
data your community may collect. Potential costs
associated with risks of data breach or lawsuits
based on abuse of surveillance also need to be
recognized.70
Questions about costs cannot be dismissed solely
because your community is seeking grant funding to pay for the technology. These grants are attractive
for obvious reasons: they appear to allow your community to buy a technology without having to spend
local taxpayer dollars. But outside grants may not cover the costs that follow a technology’s adoption,
particularly the long-term costs of operation, repairs, and personnel. Estimating these costs as accurately
as possible — and making sure those estimates are shared with the community and made part of the
debate about adopting surveillance — is key.
What are the legal risks and associated potential costs of the surveillance proposal?
Surveillance technology can carry a number of significant legal risks and requirements, in part because of
rapid changes to privacy and surveillance law. Even under current law, misuse of surveillance systems or
data, or technical glitches outside of your control could subject your community to potential legal liability.
And as courts and lawmakers continue to reassess how privacy and free speech rights should apply in the
digital age, there is a risk that your community’s investment in surveillance technology could leave it
saddled with equipment that can no longer be legally used as intended. These factors need to be
accounted for when performing a cost-benefit analysis of any surveillance proposal. 71
“One more question to ask ourselves is whether
we are carefully considering the infrastructure
that is needed to support technology — the
costs of monitoring it and of staffing technology
units at a time when departments are laying off
civilians. We really need to think about all of the
aspects of technology when initial investments
are being made.”
Police Executive Research Forum, “How Are
Innovations in Technology Affecting Policing?”70
CASE STUDY: FBI REMOVES GPS TRACKERS AFTER SUPREME COURT RULES THAT
WARRANTLESS TRACKING IMPLICATES FOURTH AMENDMENT
The FBI had installed approximately 3,000 GPS trackers on cars throughout the United States,
without a warrant, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that their use implicated the Fourth
Amendment. As a result, the FBI deactivated the warrantless trackers, and its agents had to
physically retrieve them. Obtaining warrants before using those GPS trackers would have ensured
the constitutionality of obtained evidence and saved the FBI considerable time and effort.71
17
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
How could the surveillance proposal negatively impact public safety or individual rights?
A surveillance proposal designed to benefit your community may carry side effects that undermine that
objective. Insecure systems can present a tempting target for hackers, potentially making your community
less safe in the process. Surveillance programs that target or disproportionately impact communities of
color or other marginalized groups can make it harder for law enforcement to work cooperatively with
those groups to investigate crimes. And surveillance can chill political and social engagement such as
attendance at political rallies, gun shows, or religious ceremonies if community members fear that their
lives are constantly being monitored. Identifying the harms as well as benefits of surveillance is an
important part of evaluating any proposal.72
B. ESTABLISH A SURVEILLANCE USE POLICY TO MITIGATE HARMS AND PROTECT
RIGHTS
If after careful consideration and public debate your community decides that a particular surveillance
technology is worth adopting, you need to ensure that policies are in place so that it is used properly. A clear,
legally enforceable Surveillance Use Policy that provides guidance about when and how to use surveillance
can safeguard individual rights while protecting local law enforcement and your entire community from costly
lawsuits, bad press, loss of community trust, and more. Recognizing the necessity of use policies, Seattle and
Spokane, Washington, recently passed ordinances requiring police to develop use guidelines for new
surveillance equipment before using it.73 74
CASE STUDY: REDLANDS DEPLOYS INSECURE CAMERA NETWORK
The surveillance camera network in the city of Redlands made the news for the wrong reasons
when computer security experts demonstrated how easily they could take control of the cameras.
Although the police department expressed concern about “people with criminal intent using the
public camera feed to case homes or businesses or track the police force,” the network was
deployed with no security at all. Even after the story broke, the network was secured with an
outdated encryption protocol that a researcher described as “putting a diary lock on your front
door.”72
CASE STUDY: ALAMEDA COUNTY SOLICITS PUBLIC INPUT FOR STINGRAY POLICY
Before upgrading its cell phone surveillance technology, the Alameda County District Attorney
publicly released its draft use policy and solicited feedback from the community. In response to
feedback, the District Attorney made changes that resulted in a policy requiring a warrant for the
use of the device and strict limits on how data could be used. This transparent and democratic
process helped build community trust and ensured a stronger set of safeguards would be in place
from the start.74
18
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
Here are some of the key elements of a robust, legally enforceable Surveillance Use policy:
1. USE APPROPRIATELY: PLACE CLEAR LIMITS ON SURVEILLANCE
If your community has been following this guide, you’ve already defined community purposes that justify a
particular technology. Now it’s time to use those purposes to decide and codify both the acceptable uses that
will benefit the community and those that are simply prohibited. Doing so safeguards against use of the
technology in a manner the community never intended.
When is surveillance permitted or prohibited?
The first step is straightforward but essential: defining how and
when the technology may be used. Every entity in your community
that conducts surveillance should have a policy that clearly specifies
appropriate uses of each technology and bars all other uses.
In order to benefit from and reflect community input and oversight,
technology should only be used for the particular purposes for
which it was acquired. Any proposed new uses should be subject to the same public discussion as the
acquisition of new technology, allowing the community to weigh in on the appropriateness of any
expanded purpose.
Your policy needs to be consistent with constitutional
guarantees of privacy, equal protection, freedom of
speech, and freedom of religion. In fact, your use
policy should not only address clearly unlawful but
also potentially unlawful uses of surveillance
technology. If there are questions about the legality of
a specific practice, your use policy should prohibit that
practice until there is a definite answer.75
What legal or internal process is required to use surveillance?
It is also important to ensure that all legally required and internal processes are followed each time
surveillance is used. These processes help to prevent unauthorized or outright illegal uses and also make
sure that even appropriate uses of the surveillance technology minimize the impact on individual rights.76
In many cases, the best way to ensure that legal requirements are satisfied is to require a search warrant
prior to conducting surveillance, allowing the court system to play a role in overseeing the program. With
the streamlined modern warrant process, officers can seek a judge’s approval quickly and easily by simply
placing a phone call or using a mobile device.77
Internal recordkeeping, including recording the reason for each use of surveillance, can also help ensure
compliance with the appropriate use policy and create an audit trail for ongoing feedback and oversight.
How are officers trained before they conduct surveillance?
Having clear policies is not helpful if the people using the technology or the data it collects lack the
underlying knowledge to comply with those policies. Training programs for anyone involved with
surveillance must be comprehensive, encompassing not just the technology and Surveillance Use Policy
but the purposes and legal rules that inform the Policy. Training should spell out both the obligations of
anyone using the technology and the consequences for policy violations.
The police need to “have more of a dialog
with the council, because we are the ones
that . . . approve funding decisions and we
want to make sure . . . that you are
hearing everything that we hear as well.”
Seattle Councilmember Bruce Harrell 76
Publicly available use policies
were found for less than 1 in
5 local California surveillance
programs (ACLU 2014
research).75
19
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
Are you only collecting necessary data?
Ensuring that surveillance technology is used in a way that accomplishes its stated purpose without
collecting additional data is a straightforward way to reduce the risk of privacy invasions. That’s why the
federal statute authorizing wiretaps has from its inception required “minimization” — an effort to make
sure that even after a warrant has been issued and collection is underway, police only intercept
communications relevant to the investigation, not every communication made by the target.78
The same principle should be applied to other forms of surveillance, requiring a reasonable effort to
avoid collecting superfluous information. For example, a police department that deploys drones to an
accident scene to quickly identify any need for police or emergency intervention does not need to record
and retain video footage.79
2. PREVENT MISUSE OF DATA: LIMIT WHEN DATA CAN BE USED AND WHO CAN ACCESS IT
Even data collected for a legitimate purpose can be put to illegitimate uses. It is essential that your community
establish clear rules so that surveillance data is used only for approved purposes. Doing so not only prevents
outright abuses of the data that can erode public trust but also keeps “mission creep” from altering the
balance that you have already worked out between government actions and individual liberties.
How will surveillance data be secured?
The first step in preventing misuse of data is ensuring that it is stored securely. Technical safeguards are
necessary to help protect community members’ data from accidental disclosure and misuse. You should
consult with experts and implement safeguards at multiple levels that protect data at all points in its
lifespan.
Your community may already possess secure storage space separated from other databases and computer
systems. This provides you with an obvious level of control. If you choose to store data elsewhere, you
must ensure that it is secure and subject to your safeguards. Your community should also designate
someone as an authority or custodian with responsibility over community members’ data and your
storage systems. 80
CASE STUDY: OHIO STATE HIGHWAY PATROL RETAINS ONLY ALPR HITS
The Ohio State Highway Patrol policy for automated license plate readers (ALPRs) states, “all ‘non‐
hit’ captures shall be deleted immediately.” The ALPR program is intended to detect stolen
vehicles, Amber Alerts, and persons with outstanding warrants. As a result, retaining data about
“non‐hit” vehicles does not further that purpose, and a policy of deleting that data immediately
protects the community from unnecessary risks.79
CASE STUDY: MONTEREY COUNTY SUFFERS DATA BREACH
DUE TO “TOTALLY OBSOLETE” DATA PRACTICES
Monterey County’s computer systems were breached in 2013 and the personal information of over
140,000 local residents was stolen. A subsequent grand jury investigation concluded that the
breach stemmed from “totally obsolete” data practices and a failure to follow privacy laws. The
grand jury warned of “serious financial consequences” if the county failed to change its practices.80
20
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
Under what circumstances can collected data be accessed or used?
In addition to technical safeguards to protect data, you should also limit the circumstances under which it
can be legitimately accessed or used. These limits should be based on the specific purposes your
community agreed to when it adopted the technology. For example, if the purpose of the technology is to
address specific violent crimes, your policy might allow database searches only as part of an official
investigation of a violent crime, and only for data that is related to that investigation. Data access and use
policies that are consistent with the articulated purposes for the system will provide guidance to operators
and engender community trust by deterring abuses that can follow unfettered access to surveillance data.
Your community’s goal of balancing privacy and security will be easier to achieve if particular data access
and use limits are accompanied by steps to ensure the rules are followed. Database access should be
limited — for example, by only allowing junior staff to access data with the permission and guidance of a
more senior officer, or by limiting data access solely to senior officers. As explained earlier, training is a
must. Restricting data access to a limited set of trained employees decreases the potential that community
members’ data can be misused. To ensure targeted use of data, it may be appropriate to require a search
warrant or similar external process before the data can be accessed at all. 81
What limits exist on sharing data with outside entities?
Placing limits on how data use is a great step, but third parties that receive the collected data may not
have the same limits in place. To protect residents’ privacy and prevent uses of information contrary to
community desires, it is important to articulate when — if ever — the technology’s purposes justify
sharing any collected information. During the public debate over your Surveillance Use Policy, the
community should decide when sharing is permissible and when it is prohibited.
If data can be shared, your community must also determine how to ensure that the entity receiving the
data lives up to your community’s standards. This may require contractual language binding the third
party to your data policies and safeguards. For example, the city of Menlo Park, California, specifically
requires by ordinance that any agreement with Northern California’s fusion center demand compliance
with the City’s own retention policy.82 If a potential recipient of your data cannot agree with your policies
or conditions, the best choice is to not share your data.
3. LIMIT DATA RETENTION: KEEP INFORMATION ONLY AS LONG AS NECESSARY
The longer you retain information, the greater the potential privacy and security risks. The easiest way to
minimize these risks is to retain only necessary information and to delete it after the purpose for its collection
is achieved.
CASE STUDY: LAX POLICIES LEAD TO “LOVEINT” ABUSE
Without strong policies limiting access to data, the temptation to misuse government databases
for personal interests can be hard to resist. The NSA even has a specific term, LOVEINT, for
employees who monitor their significant others. Two Fairfield, CA, officers could face criminal
charges after using a statewide police database to screen women from online dating sites.81
21
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
Does retaining data help accomplish the purpose for which the technology was acquired?
To maximize the usefulness of your technology and minimize civil liberties concerns, a retention period
should not be longer than necessary to directly advance community purposes. For instance, deploying
automated license plate readers to83
locate stolen or Amber Alert vehicles
is not aided by the collection of
historical data. Retaining data “just in
case it becomes useful” increases the
risk that data will be used contrary to
the purpose agreed upon by the
community or wind up in the hands of
a bad actor. Retaining data can also increase the costs of surveillance by requiring expensive storage
solutions and making it harder to effectively use the system. Focusing on the specific objective that
surveillance is intended to accomplish can help you determine a retention period that balances that
objective with the costs and risks associated with data retention.
Are there other legal or policy reasons that inform your data retention policy?
There may be other legal and policy issues that affect your data retention policy, informed by legal
concerns unrelated to your community’s purposes. For example, your community should choose a
retention period that balances a desire to be responsive to public records requests with residents’ civil
liberties, including privacy. Responsiveness to records requests should not be a primary justification for
an extended retention period, however, since community concerns about surveillance are better
addressed by retaining less information in the first place.
What happens when the data retention period expires?
To prevent misuse of data after your community’s desired retention period has lapsed, ensure that data is
regularly deleted after that time. This can be accomplished via automated technical measures or periodic
audits.
Before data is collected, your community should also decide whether there are any specific circumstances
that justify the retention of data beyond your community’s chosen retention period. For instance, it might
be appropriate to preserve data relevant to a specific ongoing investigation, data necessary to complete an
investigation of internal data misuse, and data relevant to a criminal defendant’s case. Any such
conditions should be informed by your community’s purposes and clearly articulated in your Surveillance
Use Policy.
C. ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY BY ENFORCING POLICIES AND ENCOURAGING ONGOING
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Even if your community has already deployed surveillance technology, the community as a whole has a
crucial role in ensuring that the public interest is promoted through its use. One key question is whether your
Surveillance Use Policy is effectively safeguarding individual rights and preventing abuses. A second is
whether the assumptions you made when you approved surveillance in the first place still hold true after
actual experience with the technology and its impact. Revamping or even cancelling an ineffective or
imbalanced program is better than wasting time, money, and community trust on a tool that does more harm
than good.
“If there’s anything of a criminal nature recorded on video,
it’s grabbed and inventoried within hours. Most
everything else is never looked at again, so it’s purged
automatically.”
Commander Steven Caluris, Chicago Police Department83
22
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
1. IDENTIFY AND ADDRESS ABUSES: AUDIT USE OF TECHNOLOGIES AND DATA AND ADDRESS ANY MISUSE
The safeguards in your Surveillance Use Policy are only worthwhile if the policy is actually followed. But
given the secretive nature of many forms of surveillance, ensuring compliance takes conscious effort. Strong
internal and external oversight and auditing can help identify isolated or systemic abuses of surveillance
technology, and legally enforceable sanctions can deter both.
How are operators supervised?
Personnel management and technical measures both
facilitate internal oversight of your technology and data.
Designating a chain of command for a given surveillance
technology helps specific personnel understand what
responsibilities they have over the equipment or data and
makes it easy to trace where misuse occurred. All of this
helps your community deter abuses and guarantee that
resources are used wisely. 84
How will misuses of the technology be identified?
The best way to identify misuse of surveillance is to “watch the watchers” by keeping thorough records
of each time surveillance is deployed or surveillance data is called up. The person or persons with
oversight responsibility should be independent, given full access to the technology and database, and
empowered to receive complaints about misuse and draw conclusions that can lead to legally enforceable
consequences. To catch what human oversight misses, your community should ensure that technical
measures including access controls and audit logs are in place. Placing the oversight authority with a third
party such as the City Council or a citizen panel may also increase the likelihood that the misuses are
accurately identified. 85
What legally enforceable sanctions exist to deter misuse and abuse of this technology?
By establishing consequences for violations of the guidelines, your community encourages proper use of
the technology and sends a message that community values apply to everyone. Depending on the
circumstances, sanctions ranging from retraining to fines, suspensions, or termination may be appropriate
for violations of your Surveillance Use Policy. In addition, your community should provide an
appropriate remedy for anyone harmed by an abuse. Legally enforceable sanctions discourage misuse and
guarantee that aggrieved community members will be made whole.
“As stewards of the public’s
interests, we know the government
doesn’t get to simply say ‘trust us’
and carry on: we have to earn that
trust on a daily basis. We have to be
accountable and transparent….”
Former Oakland Mayor Jean Quan84
CASE STUDY: FRESNO ADOPTS ANNUAL AUDIT OF VIDEO SURVEILLANCE
When the Fresno Police Department proposed a citywide video‐policing program using live‐feed
cameras, the city council required an annual independent audit to ensure that all of the privacy
and security guidelines for the system’s use were being followed. Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer
said he supported the audit: “I have no doubt the audit will be very helpful to our ongoing video
policing operations.” The city appointed a retired federal district court judge as auditor, who then
examined current use of the system and made specific policy recommendations.85
23
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
2. KEEP THE DIALOG OPEN: ENCOURAGE PUBLIC OVERSIGHT AND ONGOING DISCUSSION
Community oversight and feedback plays two essential roles in ensuring that any current surveillance program
actually benefits your community. First, transparency about abuses of surveillance allows the community to
determine whether the Surveillance Use Policy or any associated sanctions need to be revised to address the
issue. Second, as your community learns first-hand whether surveillance is effective and how it impacts
different individuals and groups, you may wish to reassess the purposes for which surveillance should be used
or even whether it should still be used at all. Surveillance should be under the control of the community at all
times, not just when it is initially being considered.
How will the community continue to be informed about the surveillance program?
It is important that your community’s oversight mechanisms not only are in place before surveillance is
used but also remain available as long as the surveillance program continues or any collected data
remains. This allows the community to continue to learn about and provide feedback on the effectiveness
and impact of surveillance, and provides the information you will need to evaluate any changes going
forward.
One of the most effective ways to keep your community informed is to produce an annual report about
each surveillance technology that has been used in the past year. This report should include:
o A description of how and how often the technology was used;
o Information, including crime statistics, that indicate whether the technology was effective at
accomplishing its stated purpose;
o A summary of community complaints or concerns about the technology;
o Information about any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, data breaches, or similar incidents,
including the actions taken in response, or results of any internal audits;
o Whether and how data acquired through the use of the technology was shared with any outside
entities;
o Statistics and information about Public Records Act requests, including responses; and
o The total annual costs for the technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs, and any
external funding available to fund any or all of those costs in the coming year.
In addition, there may be other ways to provide your community with information about the operation
and effectiveness of the surveillance program. Responding to Public Records Act requests with as much
information as possible, taking into account factors such as the privacy rights of individuals whose
information may be included in the requested data, is one way to allow interested community members
access to concrete information about the program. Creating standing committees of community
members, regularly holding public events and forums, and establishing open inspection periods for the
technology can also help keep the community informed.
How will local officials and the public re‐evaluate the decision to engage in surveillance or the
existing policies and safeguards?
The community’s decision to approve surveillance should be reconsidered on an annual basis. If there is
evidence that calls into question the conclusion that the benefits of surveillance outweigh costs and
concerns, or that there are better ways to achieve the same purpose with fewer costs or risks,
policymakers should seek community input and take whatever action is appropriate to address these
concerns. That may involve narrowing the purpose or scope of surveillance, requiring modifications to
the Surveillance Use Policy, or exploring alternatives that better address community needs.
24
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
Conclusion
Communities increasingly understand the need to make smart choices about surveillance technology and
ensure that time, energy, and resources are not spent on systems that cost more, do less, and threaten the
rights of community members. Community members demand — and deserve — a voice in any decisions
about surveillance technology. Proper transparency, accountability, and oversight must be the rule in
considering any surveillance technology proposal. We hope the recommendations in this guide help you work
to enact local and state policies to ensure consistent public process each time surveillance technology is
considered.
25
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
Appendix: Model Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance
A. KEY PRINCIPLES OF THE MODEL ORDINANCE
o Informed Public Debate at Earliest Stage of Process: Public notice, distribution of information
about the proposal, and public debate prior to seeking funding or otherwise moving forward with
surveillance technology proposals.
o Determination that Benefits Outweigh Costs and Concerns: Local leaders, after facilitating an
informed public debate, expressly consider costs (fiscal and civil liberties) and determine that
surveillance technology is appropriate or not before moving forward.
o Thorough Surveillance Use Policy: Legally enforceable Surveillance Use Policy with robust civil
liberties, civil rights, and security safeguards approved by policymakers.
o Ongoing Oversight & Accountability: Proper oversight of surveillance technology use and
accountability through annual reporting, review by policymakers, and enforcement mechanisms.
B. MODEL ORDINANCE TEXT
The [Council/Board of Supervisors] finds that any decision to use surveillance technology must be judiciously
balanced with the need to protect civil rights and civil liberties, including privacy and free expression, and the
costs to [City/County]. The [Council/Board] finds that proper transparency, oversight, and accountability are
fundamental to minimizing the risks posed by surveillance technologies. The [Council/Board] finds it
essential to have an informed public debate as early as possible about whether to adopt surveillance
technology. The [Council/Board] finds it necessary that legally enforceable safeguards be in place to protect
civil liberties and civil rights before any surveillance technology is deployed. The [Council/Board] finds that if
surveillance technology is approved, there must be continued oversight and annual evaluation to ensure that
safeguards are being followed and that the surveillance technology’s benefits outweigh its costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the [Council/Board] of [City/County] adopts the following:
Section 1. Title
This ordinance shall be known as the Surveillance & Community Safety Ordinance.
Section 2. [Council/Board] Approval Requirement
1) A [City/County] entity must obtain [Council/Board] approval at a properly-noticed public hearing
prior to any of the following:
a) Seeking funds for surveillance technology, including but not limited to applying for a grant
or soliciting or accepting state or federal funds or in-kind or other donations;
b) Acquiring new surveillance technology, including but not limited to procuring such
technology without the exchange of monies or consideration;
c) Using new surveillance technology, or using existing surveillance technology for a purpose,
in a manner or in a location not previously approved by the [Council/Board]; or
d) Entering into an agreement with a non-[City/County] entity to acquire, share or otherwise
use surveillance technology or the information it provides.
2) A [City/County] entity must obtain [Council/Board] approval of a Surveillance Use Policy prior to
engaging in any of the activities described in subsection (1)(b)-(d).
26
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
Section 3. Information Required
1) The [City/County] entity seeking approval under Section 2 shall submit to the [Council/Board] a
Surveillance Impact Report and a proposed Surveillance Use Policy at least forty-five (45) days prior
to the public hearing.
2) The [Council/Board] shall publicly release in print and online the Surveillance Impact Report and
proposed Surveillance Use Policy at least thirty (30) days prior to the public hearing.
Section 4. Determination by [Council/Board] that Benefits Outweigh Costs and Concerns
The [Council/Board] shall only approve any action described in Section 2, subsection (1) of this ordinance
after making a determination that the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology outweigh the
costs and that the proposal will safeguard civil liberties and civil rights.
Section 5. Compliance for Existing Surveillance Technology
Each [City/County] entity possessing or using surveillance technology prior to the effective date of this
ordinance shall submit a proposed Surveillance Use Policy no later than ninety (90) days following the
effective date of this ordinance for review and approval by [Council/Board]. If such review and approval has
not occurred within sixty (60) days of the submission date, the [City/County] entity shall cease its use of the
surveillance technology until such review and approval occurs.
Section 6. Oversight Following [Council/Board] Approval
1) A [City/County] entity which obtained approval for the use of surveillance technology must submit a
Surveillance Report for each such surveillance technology to the [Council/Board] within twelve (12)
months of [Council/Board] approval and annually thereafter on or before November 1.
2) Based upon information provided in the Surveillance Report, the [Council/Board] shall determine
whether the benefits to the community of the surveillance technology outweigh the costs and
whether civil liberties and civil rights are safeguarded. If the benefits do not outweigh the costs or
civil rights and civil liberties are not safeguarded, the [Council/Board] shall direct that use of the
surveillance technology cease and/or require modifications to the Surveillance Use Policy that will
resolve the above concerns.
3) No later than January 15 of each year, the [Council/Board] shall hold a public meeting and publicly
release in print and online a report that includes, for the prior year:
a. A summary of all requests for [Council/Board] approval pursuant to Section 2 or Section 5,
including whether the [Council/Board] approved or rejected the proposal and/or required
changes to a proposed Surveillance Use Policy before approval; and
b. All Surveillance Reports submitted.
Section 7. Definitions
The following definitions apply to this Ordinance:
1) “Surveillance Report” means a written report concerning a specific surveillance technology that
includes all of the following:
a. A description of how the surveillance technology was used;
b. Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the surveillance technology was
shared with outside entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed,
under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the
disclosure(s);
c. A summary of community complaints or concerns about the surveillance technology;
27
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
d. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the Surveillance Use
Policy, and any actions taken in response;
e. Information, including crime statistics, that help the community assess whether the
surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified purposes;
f. Statistics and information about public records act requests, including response rates; and
g. Total annual costs for the surveillance technology, including personnel and other ongoing
costs, and what source of funding will fund the technology in the coming year.
2) “[City/County] entity” means any department, bureau, division, or unit of the [City/County].
3) “Surveillance technology” means any electronic device, system utilizing an electronic device, or
similar used, designed, or primarily intended to collect, retain, process, or share audio, electronic,
visual, location, thermal, olfactory or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of
being associated with, any individual or group.
4) “Surveillance Impact Report” means a publicly released written report including at a minimum the
following: (a) Information describing the surveillance technology and how it works, including
product descriptions from manufacturers; (b) information on the proposed purposes(s) for the
surveillance technology; (c) the location(s) it may be deployed and crime statistics for any location(s);
(d) an assessment identifying any potential impact on civil liberties and civil rights and discussing any
plans to safeguard the rights of the public; and (e) the fiscal costs for the surveillance technology,
including initial purchase, personnel and other ongoing costs, and any current or potential sources of
funding.
5) "Surveillance Use Policy" means a publicly released and legally enforceable policy for use of the
surveillance technology that at a minimum specifies the following:
a. Purpose: The specific purpose(s) that the surveillance technology is intended to advance.
b. Authorized Use: The uses that are authorized, the rules and processes required prior to
such use, and the uses that are prohibited.
c. Data Collection: The information that can be collected by the surveillance technology.
d. Data Access: The individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the rules
and processes required prior to access or use of the information.
e. Data Protection: The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access,
including encryption and access control mechanisms.
f. Data Retention: The time period, if any, for which information collected by the
surveillance technology will be routinely retained, the reason such retention period is
appropriate to further the purpose(s), the process by which the information is regularly
deleted after that period lapses, and the specific conditions that must be met to retain
information beyond that period.
g. Public Access: How collected information can be accessed or used by members of the
public, including criminal defendants.
h. Third Party Data Sharing: If and how other [City/County] or non-[City/County] entities
can access or use the information, including any required justification or legal standard
necessary to do so and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information.
i. Training: The training required for any individual authorized to use the surveillance
technology or to access information collected by the surveillance technology, including any
training materials.
j. Auditing and Oversight: The mechanisms to ensure that the Surveillance Use Policy is
followed, including internal personnel assigned to ensure compliance with the policy,
internal recordkeeping of the use of the technology or access to information collected by the
technology, technical measures to monitor for misuse, any independent person or entity with
oversight authority, and the legally enforceable sanctions for violations of the policy.
28
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
Section 8. Enforcement
1) Any violation of this Ordinance constitutes an injury, and any person may institute proceedings for
injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or writ of mandate in any court of competent jurisdiction to
enforce this Ordinance.
2) A court shall award costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the plaintiff who is the prevailing party in
an action brought to enforce this Ordinance.
3) In addition, for a willful, intentional, or reckless violation of this Ordinance, an individual shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and may be punished by a fine not exceeding $1,000 per violation,
imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six months, or both such a fine and imprisonment.
Section 9. Severability
The provisions in this Ordinance are severable. If any part or provision of this Ordinance, or the application
of this Ordinance to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance, including
the application of such part or provisions to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected by such
holding and shall continue to have force and effect.
Section 10. Effective Date
This Ordinance shall take effect on [DATE].
29
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
1 For example, the San Francisco Police Department’s Mission Statement states that “policing strategies must preserve
and advance democratic values” and that “police must respect and protect the rights of all citizens as guaranteed by the
state’s Constitution.” Police Department, Mission Statement, http://sf-police.org/index.aspx?page=1616.
2 B.T. Lewis & Taymeh Jahsi, Stop using social media to monitor south Fresno’s protesters, The Fresno Bee, Feb. 10, 2016,
available at http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article59388976.html.
3 Matt Cagle. This Surveillance Software is Probably Spying on #BlackLivesMatter, ACLU of Northern California (Dec. 15,
2015), https://www.aclunc.org/blog/surveillance-software-probably-spying-blacklivesmatter.
4 See Press Release, Leadership Conference, Civil Rights Principles for the Era of Big Data,
http://www.civilrights.org/press/2014/civil-rights-principles-big-data.html.
5 Terrence O’Brien, Caught Spying on Student, FBI Demands GPS Tracker Back, Wired.com, Oct. 7, 2010,
http://www.wired.com/2010/10/fbi-tracking-device/.
6 Michael Isikoff, FBI Tracks Suspects’ Cell Phones Without a Warrant, Newsweek, Feb, 18, 2010 (updated Mar. 13, 2010),
available at http://www.newsweek.com/fbi-tracks-suspects-cell-phones-without-warrant-75099.
7 David Kravets, Rights Groups Decry New NSA Leak: Snooping on Muslim-Americans’ E-mail, Ars Technica (July 9, 2014),
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/rights-groups-decry-new-nsa-leak-snooping-on-muslim-americans-e-
mail/.
8 Matt Apuzzo and Al Baker, New York to Appoint Civilian to Monitor Police’s Counterterrorism Activity, N.Y. Times, Jan. 7,
2016, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/08/nyregion/new-york-to-appoint-monitor-to-review-polices-
counterterrorism-activity.html; Case page, Raza v. City of New York – Legal Challenge to NYPD Muslim Surveillance
Program, Jan. 7, 2016, https://www.aclu.org/cases/raza-v-city-new-york-legal-challenge-nypd-muslim-surveillance-
program.
9 See Tanvir v. Holder, Case No. 13-CV-6951 (S.D. N.Y. Apr. 22, 2014) (First Amended Complaint), available at
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/lawsuit-accusing-us-of-putting-people-on-no-fly-list-after-they-
say-they-wont-spy/941/.
10 George Joseph, Exclusive: Feds Regularly Monitored Black Lives Matter Since Ferguson, The Intercept, July 24, 2015,
https://theintercept.com/2015/07/24/documents-show-department-homeland-security-monitoring-black-lives-matter-
since-ferguson/.
11 Matt Cagle. This Surveillance Software is Probably Spying on #BlackLivesMatter, ACLU of Northern California (Dec. 15,
2015), https://www.aclunc.org/blog/surveillance-software-probably-spying-blacklivesmatter; see also Shaun King, Fresno
police join group of officials monitoring #BlackLivesMatter hashtag, labeling a peaceful movement a threat, N.Y. Daily News, Dec. 17,
2015, available at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/king-monitoring-blacklivesmatter-labels-movement-
threat-article-1.2468808.
12 David Rogers, Black Lives Matter Supporters in Oregon Targeted by State Surveillance, ACLU Speak Freely blog, Nov. 11,
2015, https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/black-lives-matter-supporters-oregon-targeted-state-surveillance;
Courtney Sherwood, Oregon attorney general ‘appalled’ by probe of Black Lives Matter, Reuters, Nov. 11, 2015,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oregon-race-idUSKCN0T104N20151112.
13 Jeremy Gillula and Dave Maass, What You Can Learn from Oakland’s Raw ALPR Data, Electronic Frontier Foundation,
Jan. 21, 2015, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/01/what-we-learned-oakland-raw-alpr-data.
14 Angel Jennings, Richard Winston & James Rainey, Sherriff’s Secret Air Surveillance of Compton Sparks Outrage, L.A. Times,
Apr. 23, 2014, available at http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sheriffs-surveillance-compton-outrage-
20140423-story.html.
15 Andrea Peterson, LOVEINT: When NSA Officers Use Their Spying Power on Love Interests, Wash. Post, Aug. 24, 2013,
available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/24/loveint-when-nsa-officers-use-their-
spying-power-on-love-interests/.
16 See Julia Angwin & Jennifer Valentino-DeVries, New Tracking Frontier: Your License Plates, Wall St. J., Sep. 29, 2012,
available at http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390443995604578004723603576296.
17 Jenna McLaughlin, The FBI v. Apple Debate Just Got Less White, The Intercept, Mar. 8, 2016,
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/08/the-fbi-vs-apple-debate-just-got-less-white/.
18 Rania Khalek, Activists of Color Lead Charge Against Surveillance, NSA, Truthout, Oct. 30, 2013, http://www.truth-
out.org/news/item/19695-activists-of-color-at-forefront-of-anti-nsa-movement.
19 Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 2489 (2014).
20 United States v. Jones, 132 S.Ct. 945, 955, 56 (2012).
Endnotes
30
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
21 Adam Goldman & Matt Apuzzo, NYPD Defends Tactics over Mosque Spying; Records Reveal New Details on Muslim
Surveillance, Huffington Post (Feb 25, 2012), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/nypd-defends-tactics-
over_n_1298997.html; Adam Goldman & Matt Apuzzo, New York Drops Unit That Spied on Muslims, N.Y. Times, April
15, 2014, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/nyregion/police-unit-that-spied-on-muslims-is-
disbanded.html.
22 Hina Shamsi and Ramzi Kassem, The NYPD spied on Muslim Americans. Will a court settlement change anything?, The
Guardian, Jan. 8, 2016, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/08/nypd-spied-muslim-americans-will-
court-settlement-bring-change.
23 Angel Jennings, Richard Winston & James Rainey, Sherriff’s Secret Air Surveillance of Compton Sparks Outrage, L.A. Times,
Apr. 23, 2014, available at http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sheriffs-surveillance-compton-outrage-
20140423-story.html.
24 Police Executive Research Forum, How Are Innovations in Technology Transforming Policing? 26 (Jan. 2012) [hereinafter
PERF Report], available at http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Critical_Issues_Series/
how%20are%20innovations%20in%20technology%20transforming%20policing%202012.pdf.
25 Press Release, Office of the Controller, Butkovitz Alarmed by Police Camera Program, June 20, 2012,
http://www.philadelphiacontroller.org/page.asp?id=792.
26 See Fazaga v. FBI, 844 F.Supp.2d 1022 (C.D. Cal. 2012).
27 Adam Goldman, NYPD settles lawsuits over Muslim monitoring, Wash. Post, Jan. 7, 2016, available at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nypd-settles-lawsuits-over-muslim-
monitoring/2016/01/07/bdc8eb98-b3dc-11e5-9388-466021d971de_story.html.
28 See Tim Cushing, Another Bogus Hit from a License Plate Reader Results in Another Citizen Surrounded by Cops with Guns Out,
TechDirt (May 23, 2014), https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140513/07404127218/another-bogus-hit-license-plate-
reader-results-another-citizen-surrounded-cops-with-guns-out.shtml.
29 Symposium, The Value of Privacy, U. Cal.-Hastings School of L. Const. L. Q., Apr. 7, 2014 (oral remarks), available at
http://livestre.am/4P7Lk.
30 Cal. Civil Code § 1798.29 (2014).
31 Larry Ponemon, Cost of Data Breaches Rising Globally, Says ‘2015 Cost of a Data Breach Study: Global Analysis,’ May 27, 2015,
https://securityintelligence.com/cost-of-a-data-breach-2015/.
32 Will Kane, Oakland to Limit Surveillance Center to Port, Airport, S.F. Gate, Mar. 6, 2014, available at
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Oakland-to-limit-surveillance-center-to-port-5290273.php.
33 Cyrus Farivar, In rare move, Silicon Valley county gov’t kills stingray acquisition, Ars Technica, May 7, 2015,
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/in-rare-move-silicon-valley-county-govt-kills-stingray-acquisition/.
34 Press Release, San Jose Police Provide Statement Regarding Purchase of Unmanned Aerial System (UAS), San Jose Police Dept.,
Aug. 5, 2014, available at http://www.sjpd.org/iNews/viewPressRelease.asp?ID=1874.
35 Robert Salonga, San Jose: Police apologize for drone secrecy, promise transparency, San Jose Mercury News, Aug. 5, 2014,
available at http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_26279254/san-jose-police-apologize-secret-drone-purchase-
promise.
36 Riley v. California, 573 U.S. (2014), Slip Op. at *28.
37 U.S. v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945, 954 (2012) (Sotomayor, J., concurring); id. at 957 (Alito, Ginsberg, Breyer, and Kagan, J.,
concurring in the judgment).
38 Charlie Savage and Jonathan Wiseman, N.S.A. Collection of Bulk Call Data Is Ruled Illegal, N.Y. Times, May 7, 2015,
available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/us/nsa-phone-records-collection-ruled-illegal-by-appeals-court.html;
Klayman v. Obama, Civ. No. 13-0851 (D.D.C. Dec. 16, 2013).
39 Ballot Pamplet., Proposed Amendments to Cal. Const. with Arguments to Voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 7, 1972).
40 White v. Davis, 533 P.2d (Cal. 1975).
41 People v. Cook 41 Cal. 3d 373 (1985).
42 Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center, 592 P.2d 899 (Cal. 1979) (holding that, under the California Constitution,
members of the public have a legal right to pass out pamphlets and seek signatures in a privately owned shopping
center), aff’d, .447 U.S. 74 (1980).
43 Cal. Penal Code §§ 1546-1546.4. See generally Tracy Seipel and Eric Kurhi, California digital privacy laws boosted, protecting
consumers from Big Brother, big business, San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 9, 2015, available at
http://www.mercurynews.com/health/ci_28948653/california-digital-privacy-laws-boosted-protecting-consumers-
from.
44 Cal. Gov’t Code § 53166.
45 Cal. Civil Code §§ 1798.29, 1798.82, and 1798.90.5.
31
ONLINE AT ACLUNC.ORG/SMARTABOUTSURVEILLANCE
46 Jennifer Steinhauer and Jonathan Weisman, U.S. Surveillance in Place Since 9/11 Is Sharply Limited, N.Y. Times, Jun. 2,
2015, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/03/us/politics/senate-surveillance-bill-passes-hurdle-but-
showdown-looms.html?_r=0; see also U.S.A. Freedom Act, H.R. 2048, 114th Cong. (2016).
47 Allie Bohm, Status of Location Privacy Legislation in the States, ACLU Free Future (April 8, 2014),
https://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty-national-security/status-location-privacy-legislation-states (as of May
6, 2014).
48 Allie Bohm, Status of 2014 Domestic Drone Legislation in the States, ACLU Free Future (April 22, 2014),
https://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/status-2014-domestic-drone-legislation-states (as of May 6, 2014).
49Smart About Surveillance, ACLU of California, http://www.aclunc.org/smartaboutsurveillance.
50 Id.
51 Interview with Brian Hofer, Transparency over secrecy: Oakland’s surveillance policy, KALW Local Public Radio, available at
http://kalw.org/post/transparency-over-secrecy-oakland-s-surveillance-policy#stream/0.
52 See Bonnie Eslinger, Menlo Park Council Approves Ordinance Regulating Police Use of Surveillance, San Jose Mercury News,
May 14, 2014, available at http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_25766277/menlo-park-council-approves-
ordinance-regulating-police-use; Seattle City Council Enacts Groundbreaking Legislation Protecting Residents’ Civil Liberties, Local
Progress (May 1, 2013), http://localprogress.org/seattle-city-council-enacts-groundbreaking-legislation-protecting-
residents-civil-liberties/.
53 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, CCTV: Developing Best Practices (2007), available at
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_rpt_cctv_2007.pdf.
54 State of Surveillance in California – Findings and Recommendations, ACLU of California, Jan. 2015, available at
https://www.aclunc.org/sites/default/files/201501-aclu_ca_surveillancetech_summary_and_recommendations.pdf.
55 Redlands Police Department, Citizen Privacy Council, http://www.cityofredlands.org/police/CPC.
56 Halima Kazen, Watching the Watchers: Oakland Seeks Control of Law Enforcement Surveillance, The Guardian, July 13, 2015,
available at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/13/oakland-law-enforcement-surveillance.
57 Memorandum, Establishing Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Community Warning System and Industrial Safety Ordinance (Sept.
18, 2012), http://64.166.146.155/agenda_publish.cfm?mt=ALL&get_month=9&get_year=2012&dsp=agm&
seq=12339&rev=0&ag=241&ln=23604&nseq=0&nrev=0&pseq=12303&prev=0.
58 Keynote address of Malkia Cyril, Targeted Surveillance, Civil Rights, and the Fight for Democracy, Center for Media Justice,
Oct. 13, 2015, available at http://centerformediajustice.org/2015/10/13/targeted-surveillance-civil-rights-and-the-fight-
for-democracy/.
59 See Memorandum, City Administrator’s Weekly Report (Apr. 25, 2014),
http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/cityadministrator/documents/report/oak046804.pdf.
60 http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/o/CityAdministration/d/PrivacyAdvisoryCommission/index.htm
61 Matt Richtel, A Police Gadget Tracks Phones? Shhh! It’s Secret, N.Y. Times, Mar. 15, 2015, available at
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/16/business/a-police-gadget-tracks-phones-shhh-its-secret.html?_r=0; Cyrus
Farivar, In rare move, Silicon Valley county gov’t kills stingray acquisition, Ars Technica, May 7, 2015,
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/in-rare-move-silicon-valley-county-govt-kills-stingray-acquisition/.
62 Ali Winston, Oakland City Council Rolls Back the Domain Awareness Center, East Bay Express (Mar. 5, 2014),
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2014/03/05/oakland-city-council-rolls-back-the-dac.
63 Cyrus Farivar, In rare move, Silicon Valley county gov’t kills stingray acquisition, Ars Technica, May 7, 2015,
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/in-rare-move-silicon-valley-county-govt-kills-stingray-acquisition/.
64 John Malkin, Surveillance City? GoodTimes, Jan 29, 2014,
http://www.gtweekly.com/index.php/santacruznews/goodtimescoverstories/5386surveillancecity.html.
65 Robert Salonga, San Jose: Police Apologize for Drone Secrecy, Promise Transparency, San Jose Mercury News, Aug 5, 2014,
available at http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_26279254/san-jose-police-apologize-secret-drone-purchase-
promise.
66 See Oakland City Auditor, Police Technology Performance Audit: FY 2006–07 through 2010–11 (2012), available at
http://www.oaklandauditor.com/images/oakland/auditreports/0pd%20tech.pdf.
67 See Citris, Cistris Study on SF Public Cameras Released (Jan. 9, 2009), http://citris-uc.org/citris-study-on-sf-public-
cameras-released/.
68 See David P. Farrington & Brandon C. Welsh, Effects of Improved Street Lighting on Crime: A Systematic Review, Home
Office Research Study 251 (Aug. 2002), p. 42; Ronald V. Clarke, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services, Improving Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas (Dec. 2008), available at
http://cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e1208-StreetLighting.pdf; Jay Beeber, Collision Analysis of the Photo Enforced Intersection
in Walnut, CA, http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2014/ca-walnut.pdf.
69 See Steve Scauzillo, Red Light Cameras Being Stopped, L.A. Daily News (Jan. 21, 2014),
http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20140121/red-light-cameras-being-stopped.
32
MAKING SMART DECISIONS ABOUT SURVEILLANCE: A GUIDE FOR COMMUNITIES
70 PERF Report, supra note 24, at 44.
71 United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012); Joann Pan, FBI Turns Off 3000 GPS Devices After Ruling, Mashable (Feb.
27, 2012), http://mashable.com/2012/02/27/fbi-turns-off-3000-gps-devices/.
72 Kashmir Hill, Whoops, Anyone Could Watch California City’s Police Surveillance Cameras, Forbes.com (Aug. 21, 2014),
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/08/11/surveillance-cameras-for-all/.
73 Seattle City Council Enacts Groundbreaking Legislation Protecting Residents’ Civil Liberties, Local Progress (May 1, 2013),
http://localprogress.org/seattle-city-council-enacts-groundbreaking-legislation-protecting-residents-civil-liberties/;
Jamela Debelak, ACLU of Washington, Surveillance: Spokane Acts to Protect Privacy and Provide Transparency (Aug. 21, 2013),
https://aclu-wa.org/blog/surveillance-spokane-acts-protect-privacy-and-provide-transparency.
74 Matt Cagle, Alameda County Just Got a Privacy Upgrade – Alameda County, It’s Your Move, ACLU of Northern California
blog, Nov. 17, 2015, https://www.aclunc.org/blog/california-just-got-privacy-upgrade-alameda-county-its-your-move.
75 State of Surveillance in California – Findings and Recommendations, ACLU of California, Jan. 2015, available at
https://www.aclunc.org/sites/default/files/201501-aclu_ca_surveillancetech_summary_and_recommendations.pdf.
76 Seattle City Council, Public Safety, Civil Rights and Technology Committee May 2, 2012, Seattle Channel, at 38:55,
http://www.seattlechannel.org/mayor-and-council/city-council/20122013-public-safety-civil-rights-and-technology-
committee/?videoid=x23397.
77 Terry McFadden, Technology Helping Police to Receive Warrants Faster, WNDU.com (July 8, 2013), http://www.wndu.com/
news/specialreports/headlines/Technology-helping-police-to-receive-search-warrants-faster--214651051.html.
78 18 U.S.C. § 2518(5) (2014).
79 Ohio State Highway Patrol Policy No. OSP-103.29 (revised Dec. 23, 2008).
80 Julia Reynolds, Monterey County Grand Jury Finds Computer Data Risks, Monterey Herald, Aug. 21, 2014, available at
http://www.montereyherald.com/news/ci_26009592/monterey-county-grand-jury-finds-computer-data-risks.
81 Dianne Feinstein, NSA Officers Spy on Love Interests, Wall St. J., Aug. 23, 2013, available at
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/; Anjali Hemphill, Dating on
Duty: Officers Accused of Screening Dates Using Police System, CBS 13 Sacramento (Aug. 22, 2014),
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/08/22/dating-on-duty-officers-accused-of-screening-dates-using-police-system/.
82 See Bonnie Eslinger, Menlo Park Council Approves Ordinance Regulating Police Use of Surveillance, San Jose Mercury News,
May 14, 2014, available at http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_25766277/menlo-park-council-approves-
ordinance-regulating-police-use.
83 PERF Report, supra note 24, at 36.
84 Dan Brekke, Oakland Approves Scaled-Back Version of Disputed Surveillance Center, KQED.com, Mar. 5, 2014,
http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2014/03/04/oakland-mayor-jean-quan-suggests-scaling-back-domain-awareness-center.
85 George Hostetter, Former Judge Wanger Writes Far-Ranging Audit on Fresno Video Policing, Fresno Bee, Jan. 7, 2014,
available at http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/01/07/3701754/judge-wanger-delivers-impressive.html.
Back Cover Citations
Editorial, ACLU offers a smart safeguard for using surveillance technology, The Los Angeles Times, Nov. 23, 2014, available
at http://www. latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-surveillance-and-privacy-20141123-story.html.
Editorial, Bay Area governments must protect citizen privacy, San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 25, 2015, available
at http://www.sfchronicle. com/opinion/editorials/article/Bay-Area-governments-must-protect-citizen-privacy-
6101993.php.
Steven Greenhut, Surveillance is sneaking its way into cities, The San Diego Union-Tribune, Nov. 17, 2014, available at
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2014/nov/17/surveillance-sneaking-cities-model-ordinance-aclu/.
Editorial, ACLU push for surveillance policy is timely, San Jose Mercury News, Nov. 13, 2014, available
at http://www.mercurynews.com/ opinion/ci_26932183/mercury-news-editorial-aclu-push-surveillance-policy-is.
Police are spending billions of
dollars on very sophisticated
and invasive surveillance
technology. Too many of these
programs are moving forward
without public conversation,
careful consideration of the
costs and benefits, or adequate
policies in place to prevent
misuse and protect rights.
This guide provides a step-
by-step framework to
ask and answer the right
questions about surveillance
proposals and build in proper
mechanisms for transparency,
accountability, and oversight.
The guide also includes dozens
of case studies highlighting
smart approaches and missteps
to avoid and model language
for policymakers to adopt to
make sure the right process is
used every time a surveillance
proposal is considered.
“ The ACLU’s approach to vetting new technologies is so
pragmatic that cities, counties and law enforcement
agencies throughout California would be foolish
not to embrace it.”
–Editorial, Los Angeles Times
“ We urge more city and county governments to…[study]
an ordinance that would set specific rules about what
can be done with citizens’ private information.”
–Editorial, San Francisco Chronicle
“ It’s easy to see the value in [ACLU’s] approach—in all
areas of government...“
– Steven Greenhut, San Diego Union-Tribune
“ Elected leaders, not police departments, should set
policy for the use of surveillance equipment. This is the
ACLU recommendation. It’s also common sense. “
–Editorial, San Jose Mercury News