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" <llye@aclunc.org> 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" <llye@aclunc.org> 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.