Oakland, CA:

On 7/16, privacy advocates in Oakland, CA gathered at City Hall to speak out against 2 million dollars in funding for 'phase 2' of the 'Domain Awareness Center'. From the Oakland Wiki on the DAC:

"The center will act as a central aggregator for video feeds and real-time data from a number of sources around Oakland.  Possible program components include CCTV feeds, license plate recognition, facial recognition, and more.

The stated intent of the DAC is to improve the response time and coordination of first responders, rather than as a crime prevention strategy.  Analysis of the use of video surveillance by the American Civil Liberties Union concludes, "Meta-analyses from the UK, along with preliminary findings from the US, indicate strongly that video surveillance has little to no positive impact on crime."

About 20 Oakland residents spoke out (this segment is from Joshua Daniels - on twitter: http://twitter.com/harryelephante) against even the idea of voting on the proposed 2 million dollars, given the lack of understanding that the City Council members had of the proposed system. The systems architects were also unsure of key functions of this system, such as whether or not their aggregated feed would be recorded. Residents also took issue with the Public Safety committee meeting which took place three weeks prior, stating that the issue was voted on within five minutes and zero debate. 

In the end, the privacy activists spirited & educated challenge of the Council & their guests was effective enough to delay the vote for two weeks. Council member Desley Brooks closed the item session by stating her displeasure that this item was designated as 'non-controversial' and should never had been up for a vote this night.

The 'Domain Awareness Center' will be on the 7/30 Oakland City Council agenda.

http://morecontext.net

Oakland City Council - Public Push Back Against 'Domain Awareness Center' at Oakland City Hall

Voice 064

Voice 061

Voice 059

Because of Bradley Manning

#DAC Protest @ Oakland City Hall

"If Berkeley can't stop drones, there's little hope elsewhere. So give us some hope." During a May 1st town hall on drones, a former Bay Area resident and current anti-drone activist in Las Vegas encouraged two Berkeley commissions to draft strong resolutions banning drones over Berkeley skies. 

Berkeley's 'Peace and Justice Commission' and 'Police Review Commission' each have a subcommittee specifically addressing drones. Each commission (both in full attendance for this meeting) will be drafting a recommendation on drones for City Council vote, and this town hall was called by the two subcommittees to make public the conversation on the matter.     

Discussed this night by a panel of guest speakers (before a crowd of about 50 Berkeley residents) were the technical aspects and limitations of drones, whether drones would really improve public safety, civil liberties concerns and the moral and political consequences of drones.

A few guest speakers highlighted the need for policy & regulation of drones. Parker Higgins of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org) highlighted the need for Berkeley to create "thoughtful and substantive rules" for drone use "especially by law enforcement and that's because of the rate of progress of this technology...these rules need to go beyond just the technology that we're looking at today, and address the root issues that these technologies raise."

These root issues were addressed by Linda Lye from the ACLU of Northern California (http://www.aclunc.org):

"Why do they raise civil liberties concerns? Drones are capable of collecting comprehensive information about who we are, where we go, when we go, and with whom we spend our time. This is detailed information that paints an intimate portrait of our lives and who we are. The right to privacy means the right to control ones personal information."

She went on to highlight the focus of this issue by most who spoke at the town hall: Law enforcement. "Drones can be used for warrant-less mass surveillance."

A few of the other guest speakers called for an outright ban on drones in Berkeley. A representative from "Berkeley Cop Watch" (http://www.berkeleycopwatch.org) is against drones altogether for Berkeley because of the Berkeley Police Department's history of stonewalling:

"I've taken a look at the ACLU's report and I think they've really come up with some wonderful guidelines for drone use. They would be wonderful in a climate with effective police accountability. In an absence of a way to control the police, even the best guidelines, restrictions, suggestions are not really going to have an impact."

"Alameda County Against Drones" is also for an outright ban, and Neil Satterlund goes into why restrictions might not be enough (nomby.wordpress.com):

"I do not know what sorts of restrictions on drone use would be enough because I do not know what currently unforeseeable mission drone use is going to creep into." 

Aside from a drone lobbyist citing educational & recreational uses, and a Berkeley local wanting to avoid an outright ban in the case of search & rescue opportunities, the theme of an outright ban on drones during public comment was overwhelming. 

Just as the evening was wrapping up a 'Peace and Justice Commission' member immediately began a discussion with her colleagues...in favor of an outright ban. 

They hope to get whatever they decide as their proposal to City Council for a vote as soon as possible.

forabitmorecontext