From: Linda Lye [llye@aclunc.org] Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 11:28 PM To: Schaaf, Libby; Kalb, Dan Subject: RE: meeting Attachments: SAIC Inc - part 1.pdf Dear Councilmembers Schaaf and Kalb, Thank you so much for organizing the meeting today and inviting me to attend. I appreciate your efforts to get more information and find a compromise position. That said, I wanted to express my grave reservations about the potential approach of allowing the DAC to proceed to the next phase and letting the privacy policies come back later for vetting. Staff recently prepared a supplemental report, recently posted on the City Council's website, that lays out various key milestones for Phase 2 -- approval of which is before you on Tuesday. The list of milestones suggests that Phase 2 consists almost entirely of developing policies and procedures. This fails to acknowledge that the primary purpose of Phase 2, at least according to the Request for Proposal issued by the City in October 2012 is to "Design-Build-Maintain Technology Linkage System" and also to "Design-Build Existing Building Improvements" - both based on the deliverables identified in Phase 1. (I apologize in advance as I am writing from my ancient home computer and am not able to send you only the relevant documents. I am therefore attaching a somewhat large PDF - the RFP begins at page 80 of the attached PDF and the language I have just quoted that defines the services to be delivered in Phase 2 begins at page 85.) Part A of Phase 2 contemplates that the contractor "shall deliver a comprehensive DAC-TLS [Domain Awareness System Technology Linkage System] that consists of configuration data, hardware, process documentation, training and support designed specifically for day-to-day public safety operations, security, emergency responses, and business recovery uses and applications tailored to the specific needs of the City/Port." (Page 86 of attached pdf.) In other words, the point of Phase 2 is the build the DAC -- both the network architecture as well as the physical infrastructure. Privacy policies will be proposed, for the first time, in April 2014, near the end of Phase 2, when the DAC will have been virtually entirely built out. The fact that staff is now proposing to draft privacy policies during Phase 2 (this was nowhere mentioned in the RFP) really doesn't change the fundamental cart-before-the-horse nature of this approach. As a practical matter, the Council already and understandably feels tremendous pressure to keep this project moving, at the end of Phase 1 and before Phase 2 has even begun. What sort of meaningful opportunity will there really be in April 2014 to debate privacy issues when the project has essentially been built? Many in the community have serious reservations about how the privacy policies should be drafted, and from having been through this process before, I assure you the devil is in the details. With the project almost entirely built, as will be the case in April 2014, there will be enormous pressure to allow the DAC to come fully online, and the community will have very little leverage to push for meaningful privacy protections. Many in the community also have serious reservations about whether the DAC should be built at all. Realistically speaking, there will be virtually no room for discussion of that threshold question when the project is nearly built. I urge you to withhold approval of Phase 2 until the privacy issues are vetted. Sincerely, Linda Lye Staff Attorney, ACLU-NC From: Schaaf, Libby [LSchaaf@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 1:12 PM To: Linda Lye Cc: Farmer, Casey; Kalb, Dan; Bolotina, Olga; McElhaney, Lynette; Ruhland, Lisa; Santana, Deanna; Domingo, Renee; Baig, Ahsan Subject: Re: meeting Great! Thanks for letting us move it to 3pm. Mike O'Brien and Matt Davis from the Port of Oakland will be attending as well. Libby Please sign up for informative newsletter at libbyschaaf.com ! On Jul 23, 2013, at 11:06 AM, "Linda Lye" wrote: Thank you for arranging this. I look forward to meeting you all then. May I bring someone from my office? Best, Linda Linda Lye Staff Attorney, ACLU-NC From: Schaaf, Libby [mailto:LSchaaf@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 10:39 AM To: Linda Lye; Casey Farmer; Dan Kalb Cc: Olga Bolotina; Lynette McElhaney; Lisa Ruhland; Deanna Santana; Renee Domingo Subject: Re: meeting Linda, Let's meet this Thursday at 2:30pm. CM Dan Kalb and staff from CM McElhaney will be joining us. I appreciate your willingness to advise us on addressing privacy and mission creep issues as we utilize evolving information technologies, including the proposed DAC. By copy of this email I'm inviting City Administrator Deanna Santana to attend or send appropriate staff. We'll be meeting in the City Council offices on the 2nd Floor of City Hall. See you Thursday! Best, Libby Please sign up for informative newsletter at libbyschaaf.com ! On Jul 22, 2013, at 6:20 PM, "Linda Lye" wrote: Dear Libby Thanks so much for reaching out to me. Id be delighted to meet with you and others. Unfortunately, Im out of town on Friday and Monday, but could meet in Oakland on Thursday between 11:30 and 3:45 (I have a 4 pm with OPD). Im also available on Tuesday (7/30) before 4 pm. Best, Linda Linda Lye Staff Attorney ACLU Foundation of Northern California 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, California 94111 tel. (415) 621-2493 fax. (415) 255-8437 _______________________________________________________________________ This message and any files or text attached to it are intended only for the recipients named above, and contain information that may be confidential or privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, you must not read, copy, use or disclose this communication. Please also notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete all copies of it from your system. Thank you.