[0:04] >> Welcome back to this weekly
[0:05] meeting of the Health and
[0:06] Safety Committee with Denver
[0:12] City Council. Coverage of the
[0:12] health and Safety Committee
[0:15] starts now.
[0:25] >> good morning. This is the
[0:26] MARCH 18,000 Safety Committee
[0:27] meeting on mines. Darrell
[0:29] Watson. I'm honored to serve
[0:30] as the chair of this committee
[0:32] as well as the city council
[0:32] member representing all of the
[0:36] fine district 9. We have on
[0:38] the agenda this morning. An
[0:41] action for the Axon contract
[0:43] before we roll into this
[0:44] presentation. When we start
[0:45] introductions by city council
[0:46] members starting on right.
[0:50] >> Thanks sure. Kevin Flynn
[0:51] from Southwest numbers locally
[0:57] District little. Is there any
[0:57] wonder to council is a large
[1:00] from the entire police
[1:01] Boulder, Loveland.
[1:02] >> In tourists from West
[1:02] Denver district, 3 men to
[1:07] district 5. Cashman South 100
[1:08] district.
[1:08] >> Good morning. Everyone said
[1:10] in a Gonzales, also from have
[1:13] large lovely city of Denver.
[1:17] It does like a district 7.
[1:18] >> Also, we'll turn it over to
[1:20] Tim Hoffman for the
[1:22] presentation. And you think
[1:23] announcement on oldest
[1:26] introduced myself a lot of it
[1:27] the team introduced themselves
[1:28] as well. My name is Tim
[1:29] Hoffman. I'm in the Mayor's
[1:31] services, stricter policy. And
[1:32] good morning. Cliff Barnes. I
[1:36] up commander of our side your
[1:36] >> Tears to grow depiction of
[1:39] certain knowledge services.
[1:41] >> And we're here today to
[1:43] talk about license plate or
[1:44] your contract with Axon that
[1:48] closing. Through a couple
[1:48] slides and over to come into
[1:50] Barnes, talk through some of
[1:53] the specifics the details
[1:55] before you jump in. Kind of
[1:58] jumped ahead of protocol and
[1:59] Anyone was online or their
[1:59] producers are many
[2:09] councilmembers Seeing none
[2:10] sorry staff turn a battery.
[2:15] It's okay. So the contract
[2:16] details here. It's $150,000
[2:19] one year contract. Obviously
[2:24] the $150,000 Alec is below the
[2:25] normal $500,000 threshold.
[2:25] That would trigger a council
[2:29] action. The administration,
[2:30] the mayor are bringing this
[2:30] contract through the formal
[2:34] city council process,
[2:34] including in this committee
[2:38] and the full Council based on
[2:39] the promises that the mayor
[2:40] made when we were going
[2:41] through the last 10 years, no
[2:43] cost contract extension.
[2:47] They're request today is to
[2:48] vote to delay this contract,
[2:52] which is resolution. 26 a 0,
[2:52] 2, 4, 6, tweedy certain of
[2:55] MARCH 18th in the Health and
[2:57] Safety Committee. That is due
[2:59] to the fact we and our
[3:02] discussions with you all
[3:04] promised that before this item
[3:05] appeared in committee would
[3:06] get you a copy of the actual
[3:07] contract for you to review and
[3:09] to be able ask questions
[3:12] about. We getting pretty close
[3:14] to having that prepared fee,
[3:15] but it was not ready in a
[3:17] timely manner to present to
[3:19] you in advance to get even
[3:20] time to review. And so we're
[3:22] asking we're going to do the
[3:23] presentation today. We want to
[3:26] have keeping a in a discussion
[3:28] on it and get you all the
[3:29] actual contract with a little
[3:30] bit more time to review it
[3:32] before it comes back to
[3:33] committee for for further
[3:34] discussion before moving on to
[3:35] the full council. So just want
[3:36] to level. So the fact is the
[3:42] request today. It's often with
[3:43] that we here of your
[3:43] presentation questions from
[3:46] City Council members.
[3:47] >> put forward that request to
[3:48] delay action on into next
[3:50] week. One of the things I want
[3:53] insist upon is that that
[3:54] contract see by Friday. And
[3:55] can you stipulate that that
[3:58] has been the discussion, what
[3:59] acts on and with the city that
[4:00] we have, actual contract
[4:04] available by Friday.
[4:05] >> Yeah, we're we're we're
[4:06] pushing towards. We can make
[4:06] sure that you guys have ample
[4:07] time to review and understand
[4:08] that before the weekend is is
[4:10] where that needs to be in.
[4:11] Obviously we'll we'll be in
[4:17] touch as things progress. So I
[4:18] want to be clear on see they
[4:21] had contracted next week.
[4:22] >> Still will not provide time
[4:22] for us to be able to vote
[4:25] fully on that by Wednesday. So
[4:29] I want to put on the that by
[4:30] end of this week, it is
[4:31] essential. We have that
[4:35] contract. Understood. Thank
[4:35] Co-chair icu rework its
[4:42] server. It's a got so the the
[4:45] request was by Friday's sooner
[4:45] is requested. If there's
[4:48] anything that we need to do to
[4:49] help with moving that this has
[4:50] been a long process. We want
[4:51] to get to voting on this and
[4:59] we cannot without a contract.
[5:00] Good morning council members.
[5:02] I know that I'm most of you
[5:02] have seen the the presentation
[5:03] of this point and deaths. All
[5:07] try to keep the this morning.
[5:08] There's been a slight change.
[5:09] I think I can at this earlier
[5:10] in the week during the
[5:13] one-on-one briefings instead
[5:14] of having, you know, 1, 2,
[5:16] different types of cameras
[5:18] essentially in this contract.
[5:19] It's just going to be one type
[5:20] of cameras receiving 50 acts
[5:27] on outpost cameras. It for
[5:28] 150,001 year contract even
[5:29] though it's a one-year
[5:31] contract. There's a multi year
[5:32] warranty maintenance agreement
[5:36] with those 50 devices. In
[5:37] addition, we also obtain
[5:39] access to the software
[5:40] application or sweet that
[5:41] allows our users to utilize
[5:44] the lpr devices. There has
[5:46] been. And I know we went
[5:46] through some of this, but
[5:47] there has been a lot of
[5:47] scrutiny during this process
[5:51] in regards to data protection
[5:51] and safeguard surrounding the
[5:54] system based on the feedback
[5:55] that we've received from
[5:56] various converse in various
[5:57] conversations. And from that
[6:00] from the community. So, for
[6:01] example, with the software
[6:03] application when users utilize
[6:06] that they are required to put
[6:06] in a case number and reason
[6:10] for each brewery as are
[6:11] utilizing the system in all of
[6:11] those. All of that, all the
[6:12] screen transactions are stored
[6:14] in an immutable for further
[6:19] auditing and We're going to
[6:20] get much more to the details
[6:22] of the protections that are
[6:22] going to be built into this
[6:23] agreement with acts on. But
[6:26] just a high level.
[6:29] >> access to the APRIL ale pr
[6:29] system with acts on can be
[6:30] limited to Denver safety
[6:34] personnel only. That includes
[6:35] a couple of arson
[6:36] investigators from the fire
[6:37] department, but by and large
[6:37] will be police officers. But a
[6:38] couple of other safety
[6:40] personnel and vehicles. Axel
[6:43] and as a company does not have
[6:47] a national database national
[6:47] lookup feature. So it's not
[6:51] something that we're going to
[6:51] be enrolled into common. Any
[6:53] or fashion of access is really
[6:54] just going to shut down to
[6:55] police officers and a couple
[6:58] of other safety personnel.
[6:59] Denver will. It's going to be
[7:01] made clear in that contract.
[7:03] It's also something that acts
[7:05] on spells out in their
[7:05] policies and procedures.
[7:06] Denver will own and control
[7:08] its own There won't be any
[7:11] sort of using our meta data to
[7:12] train ai models. There's not
[7:15] going to be selling any of
[7:16] license plate reader. GOD of
[7:19] to 3rd parties or anything
[7:20] like that, commuter van. We'll
[7:23] talk about the the level data
[7:24] security that acts on uses. I
[7:27] think of the find vendors who
[7:28] applied in this rfp process
[7:30] acts on had the highest level
[7:36] data security. We are reducing
[7:37] the retention policy in the
[7:40] city is currently license
[7:41] plate reader information. We
[7:44] retain that data for 30 days.
[7:44] We're reducing that to 21
[7:47] days. Moving forward with this
[7:50] new contract. Then commuter
[7:51] Barnes, we get into this in
[7:51] much more detail. That access
[7:54] to the system is logging on
[7:54] and the commander can talk
[7:57] about the process by which
[7:58] safety staff make sure that
[7:58] that's being regularly
[8:06] checked.
[8:08] >> So as I as Mr Hop and
[8:09] related the there were 6 total
[8:10] bidders are one. There is one
[8:11] matter that pulled out. So,
[8:11] you know, in the end, her 5
[8:14] daughters that were considered
[8:17] in this process, acts on
[8:18] vendor brought the highest
[8:20] level security to the table
[8:22] with a fed fed ramp high
[8:24] authorization. This
[8:25] essentially that the highest
[8:28] level of of federal cloud
[8:30] security standards. And really
[8:30] what that amounts to is
[8:33] there's there's over 392
[8:34] individual security standards
[8:35] or controls that the vendor
[8:35] has to comply with and show
[8:36] that they're compliant order
[8:41] to achieve that. One of the
[8:45] specific items that my was
[8:46] sure to ask each vendor is,
[8:46] you know, there are some
[8:47] concerns about other platforms
[8:51] that MAY have, you know, the
[8:52] 15 it was recovered off of
[8:55] other types of the lpr
[8:56] platforms somewhere somewhere
[8:56] to be able to obtain physical
[8:58] access to the devices. So we
[8:59] have some really targeting
[9:00] questions of each vendor in
[9:05] that regard. Attacks on uses
[9:06] industry standard level of
[9:07] encryption on the device
[9:07] itself. So the data is
[9:11] encrypted at rest. And in
[9:14] addition to that, as images
[9:16] are collected and uploaded to
[9:19] the evidence dot com Cloud
[9:20] repository. They're
[9:20] immediately removed from the
[9:23] local device. What makes the
[9:24] recovery of any evidence or
[9:24] data from the device. Very
[9:28] improbable. And additionally,
[9:30] axons compliant with a lot of
[9:32] other standards. So nist
[9:34] center up. We also
[9:36] specifically asked each vendor
[9:39] if you know, perform manual
[9:40] third-party penetration
[9:41] testing, which they do when
[9:43] they provide us those results
[9:45] annually. Additionally, we
[9:46] asked if the city county of
[9:48] Denver could perform their own
[9:49] penetration testing on these
[9:52] devices to make sure you know,
[9:54] we can also check to make sure
[9:55] that they're complying with
[9:56] their security standards, for
[9:56] example, that the technology
[9:58] services security team could
[10:01] do that and day acknowledged
[10:01] and said that they would be
[10:02] willing to allow us to do
[10:06] that. Interesting testing. And
[10:09] really worth mentioning these
[10:10] devices integrate directly
[10:13] with the evidence dot com
[10:14] secure digital evidence
[10:15] repository that the city and
[10:16] county of Denver is used for
[10:16] many years. Acts on is the
[10:20] provider of that. But that is
[10:22] where all of data and evidence
[10:29] is securely managed in stores.
[10:31] I know the 2 mentioned that
[10:32] there's, you know, we're
[10:34] working on on various types of
[10:35] insurance, isn't controls that
[10:36] that we retain complete
[10:38] control and ownership over our
[10:40] data. I know that he did
[10:41] mention that are team during
[10:42] this process, asked very
[10:45] specifically targeting
[10:46] questions about will you
[10:48] resell or provider data in any
[10:50] way to any 3rd parties and
[10:52] axons response was no, it's
[10:52] fairly very clearly outlined
[10:53] in their data governance
[10:56] documents and policies.
[10:57] Additionally, I know that to
[10:58] mention this as well. They do
[10:58] not use any of our data to
[11:03] train any ai models. Also that
[11:05] that language is being built
[11:06] into the contract. So there's
[11:07] going to be like I said,
[11:07] numerous levels of assurances
[11:12] of that. I know that I'm also
[11:13] mentioned that platform is
[11:14] inherently different some of
[11:16] the other competitors in the
[11:17] market and that there is no
[11:18] nationwide ensuring that work
[11:19] for the specific platform all
[11:23] in all data sharing is is like
[11:24] a one to one relationship
[11:24] between one agency to another
[11:26] agency and invite only fully
[11:31] revoke a bull. So there is no,
[11:32] there's no pathway for, you
[11:35] know, inadvertently being
[11:35] enrolled in any type of
[11:36] nationwide sharing network
[11:41] cetera. The get into a little
[11:42] bit more. But I did mention
[11:43] earlier that there is an
[11:44] immutable lock, every user
[11:46] that accesses the system, the
[11:48] way in which they access the
[11:50] system date and time with the
[11:51] reason the system for has long
[11:51] been all talk about the policy
[11:55] surrounding that here shortly.
[11:56] And then as part of our our
[11:57] Dean ownership guarantees acts
[11:59] on in their data governance
[12:01] documents explicitly outline
[12:03] they receive any type of legal
[12:04] requests of subpoenas, court
[12:07] orders, cetera, for for data,
[12:10] then they refer that directly
[12:10] to the customer's city and
[12:11] county of Denver in this case
[12:12] so that our legal teams and
[12:14] city attorney's office can
[12:15] respond accordingly to those
[12:17] to those request.
[12:24] And numerous policy safeguards
[12:25] that that are in place today
[12:26] and will remain in place. This
[12:30] is not you know, a a
[12:30] completely conclusive list of
[12:31] every policy controls in
[12:32] place. But I feel like there's
[12:35] there's a few that are There's
[12:36] a mandatory training
[12:37] requirement for every user
[12:39] that's on board the system. So
[12:41] as the the Axon platform is
[12:43] implemented, all users will
[12:45] have to go mandatory training.
[12:46] Part of that training is
[12:47] outlining acceptable use of
[12:50] the platform. These devices
[12:52] MAY only be deployed and used
[12:54] areas of the city that there
[12:56] were. There is no reasonable
[12:56] expectation of privacy. So
[12:57] public areas public right of
[13:02] way. There are numerous
[13:03] explicitly prohibit uses in
[13:04] policy. And these are just a
[13:07] handful that I think it's
[13:10] worth mentioning any type of
[13:11] First Amendment violation or
[13:13] any type of monitoring is
[13:13] expressly prohibited when it
[13:15] comes to to First Amendment
[13:18] rights to any type of
[13:19] discriminatory use, harassing
[13:21] or intimidating use. Also
[13:23] expressing put prohibited in
[13:26] policy parking enforcement,
[13:28] traffic enforcement, driver's
[13:29] license, inforcement in any
[13:30] type of personal use of the
[13:35] system are also prohibited. I
[13:36] know that there has been some
[13:37] some questions about how
[13:40] officers respond to pr alerts
[13:42] in general and to make sure
[13:42] that there's verification
[13:45] being performed on those
[13:46] alerts in policy. Officers are
[13:48] not allowed to conduct vehicle
[13:50] stops just based on an lpr
[13:51] alert alone. They must verify
[13:52] the validity of that. And
[13:55] that's typically done
[13:56] communication with dispatch,
[13:58] for example, to to clear a
[13:58] plea to make sure that's a
[14:05] valid earlier. Acts on vendors
[14:07] capable of respecting any data
[14:09] retention policy that that we
[14:11] wish I know to mention that
[14:12] that policy is going to be 21
[14:16] day retention policy. There is
[14:18] a an audit trail and mentioned
[14:22] couple times now on a monthly
[14:23] basis, the cyber bureau and
[14:25] dpd on the first of every
[14:27] month pulls the lpr usage logs
[14:28] and performs a number of
[14:30] different types of mechanisms
[14:32] on those laws, including
[14:34] keyword, searches and random
[14:34] audits to make sure that all
[14:37] of the usage looks to be above
[14:39] board. Then that date is also
[14:41] shared with some data analyst
[14:42] director Safety's Office for
[14:44] further review on a monthly
[14:47] basis in policy. Any officer
[14:48] that's under investigation, I
[14:48] will have their access to the
[14:51] system immediately. Revote and
[14:52] that will stay suspended until
[14:53] for the duration of the
[14:57] investigation. As far as as
[15:00] far as to sharing I just
[15:02] wanted to this isn't policy. I
[15:02] just wanted to outline a
[15:03] couple of of of our policies
[15:06] surrounding data sharing. We
[15:08] only share data from the
[15:11] system when there's an
[15:12] official law enforcement
[15:14] investigations of another
[15:17] agency approaches and desires
[15:17] to collaborate investigating a
[15:21] certain crime has to be an
[15:22] official investigation. That
[15:23] crime that's at the center of
[15:24] that investigation has to be a
[15:26] crime. Under Colorado state
[15:28] law. So if it's if it's a
[15:32] crime somewhere else. But
[15:32] there are specific protections
[15:33] and safeguards are in
[15:33] Colorado. In those
[15:34] circumstances, we do not share
[15:37] data. That's a policy and
[15:37] additional call out is we will
[15:39] not share data to a
[15:39] prosecution related to any
[15:42] type of reproductive care If
[15:47] that wasn't enough to tear. I
[15:48] want to add too much 200 times
[15:51] covered. Most of it.
[15:52] >> Although we did conduct a
[15:55] vendor assessment on axon, it
[15:56] was a 2 full assessment
[15:57] because our internal
[16:00] questionnaire that based and
[16:00] then we also are a provision
[16:03] access to the at SunTrust
[16:05] Center where we could access
[16:09] applicable security and
[16:09] policies and other documents
[16:14] associated to Exxon. So it
[16:16] approved from seclusion and
[16:18] technology services and
[16:20] privacy. They should also know
[16:21] our price. Your view include a
[16:25] review of the ai It standards.
[16:26] National Institute Standards
[16:30] and Technology. It also
[16:32] reviewed and approved for the
[16:33] architecture information.
[16:37] Security. Ada, compliance and
[16:41] records management. You know,
[16:42] when we're doing a vendor risk
[16:43] assessment, we're looking at
[16:44] compliance. But we're also
[16:46] looking at risk reduction and
[16:47] ensuring that we're getting
[16:48] the right vendor at the right
[16:52] type of technology for that
[16:55] business or the need city. So
[16:56] it's really important to call
[16:59] out within vendor risk
[17:01] assessment conducting the
[17:04] privacy review and the review
[17:08] the technology at offers a lot
[17:12] of operational technology.
[17:13] Modern technology capabilities
[17:16] that reduces our risk by the
[17:17] information is collecting
[17:19] being minimized and then also
[17:24] from organizational policies.
[17:26] You know, often my team will
[17:27] joke around data. Privacy
[17:30] policy is just a way for.
[17:31] Organization to tell us that
[17:34] we have no privacy because
[17:34] they're telling us all of the
[17:35] different ways the data is
[17:37] being used and shared. I would
[17:40] say that when we reviewed Axon
[17:41] and we looked at the various
[17:41] privacy practices and the
[17:45] organization as a whole. It
[17:48] allows us to have ownership
[17:49] commander, bronze and tin
[17:50] spoke about know, allows us to
[17:51] have control over data. So
[17:53] definitely worthwhile to call
[17:56] out when looking at the
[17:56] Obviously, there's always risk
[17:59] when we work with any
[18:00] technology vendor. But when we
[18:02] when we look at as a whole and
[18:02] we're trying to create a risk
[18:06] rating. Choose the right
[18:09] vendors. A lot of these
[18:10] different technology
[18:11] capabilities in the policies
[18:12] of organization really reduce
[18:15] the risk overall I will stop
[18:18] there and turned over to Tim.
[18:19] That's happy to take
[18:23] questions. Thank you so much
[18:26] for the presentation. We have
[18:27] a to that started. It started
[18:27] with councilmember parody
[18:29] accounts cash councilmember.
[18:30] >> Thank you. Thank you so
[18:32] much. And thank you for a
[18:35] time. So hopefully things
[18:38] About this, both from the city
[18:39] came in from Axon. So coming
[18:43] out of I want to sort of
[18:46] clearly identify what I we
[18:47] have learned from from the
[18:48] flock to Michael that I hear
[18:49] being addressed here and I'm
[18:52] glad he's being addressed. One
[18:55] is the Denver will have its
[18:56] data tenant on servers that
[18:58] acts on rents from Microsoft
[19:00] Azure. And that's, of course,
[19:01] you know, the fact that that
[19:03] sort segregated from other
[19:04] cities data is a good thing. I
[19:09] did want to say and one point
[19:10] someone and it was so from the
[19:13] lobbying to not anyone from
[19:13] Exxon. And you could even MISS
[19:15] Spoke about this in a briefing
[19:16] and said that the data would
[19:17] be in Denver. So many of you
[19:18] were told that just because
[19:19] it's on the cloud, but it's
[19:20] segregated, which is
[19:22] improvement from and it won't
[19:23] be used to train. Algorithms
[19:24] will be sold and they will not
[19:26] respond to subpoenas on our
[19:28] behalf because unlike flocks
[19:29] are not apparently asking to
[19:30] maintain full permanent
[19:33] license to our data. And think
[19:35] we've been assured that we see
[19:36] this contract. It will have a
[19:37] provision around not adding
[19:39] features without consent.
[19:40] That's going to be really
[19:40] important because what I've
[19:41] learned in briefings with apps
[19:42] on is that they are working
[19:43] more of the sharing features,
[19:45] like flock, have, although
[19:49] with more user control and
[19:50] they're working on really how
[19:52] they're different from flock
[19:55] is that was essentially health
[19:57] care company? Fox on, of
[19:59] course, is all various kinds
[20:00] of surveillance systems. They
[20:01] collect a lot of different
[20:01] data. We have a ton of
[20:04] different contracts with them
[20:06] and they're sort of place in
[20:09] this market. Is 2 And so it's
[20:12] it's kind of it's a different
[20:12] concern than what I think
[20:13] that's we're focused on the
[20:18] lately. With flock. And I I do
[20:20] still have questions about in
[20:21] other cities like Seattle and
[20:22] we've talked about this in the
[20:25] surveillance task force. It
[20:28] would be a council to look at
[20:28] any new features that would
[20:30] have to lead to a new
[20:32] contract. So that's one thing
[20:32] I'm really concerned about is
[20:33] that there's just been a lot
[20:34] of very careful language from
[20:35] Exxon about well, today. We
[20:36] don't have this today. We
[20:39] don't have that. Also a
[20:40] suspect, their own pr for them
[20:41] is less developed than fox but
[20:45] for them do grown know your
[20:47] time. So first question, we
[20:48] need I really want to know
[20:51] going back to flock, what
[20:52] guarantees we will have that
[20:55] those cameras will stop
[20:56] collecting images. And it's
[20:57] not enough that they not. This
[20:59] law says they're not taking
[21:00] images because other cities
[21:01] have experienced that. They
[21:02] just simply kept cameras on
[21:04] even after contracts were
[21:07] ended. We need a timeline for
[21:07] removal, potentially hoods on
[21:09] those cameras. The minute that
[21:11] contract ends. I don't think
[21:12] that contract is legal in the
[21:15] first place the Charter.
[21:16] Regardless what it ends, those
[21:18] things need to be off. And the
[21:19] ceo when he was in my office
[21:21] told me that they cannot be
[21:22] black box. And so essentially
[21:23] they can't be manually turned
[21:24] off. You can't stop them from
[21:28] transmitting. So I think
[21:28] probably a good is engine or
[21:30] removal is the only way to do
[21:30] that. So that's my first
[21:31] question is what's the
[21:35] timeline for the cancer that
[21:36] counselor and my team has been
[21:37] tracking that down with flock
[21:40] to actually diligently this
[21:41] weekend. This MAY be new. I
[21:42] don't new this feature is, but
[21:43] they do have a decommissioned
[21:45] mode.
[21:46] >> And so fox is sure does
[21:48] that at the date of contract
[21:48] termination, every camera will
[21:50] be moved in to decommission
[21:52] mode and then we are seeking a
[21:53] certificate of destruction
[21:54] effective to of termination as
[21:57] well. And then my team will be
[21:59] working flock in order to
[22:00] schedule the actual removal of
[22:01] the devices as soon as
[22:04] possible. Contract
[22:05] termination. Thank you very
[22:06] Concerned because that is
[22:06] progress since we last talked
[22:09] about a week ago.
[22:10] >> From the tax services point
[22:11] of view and how how can verify
[22:12] the decommission mode is a
[22:16] real thing. Where can we and
[22:18] screenshots sent his son to
[22:19] screenshots. So I can I can
[22:20] share that. On their devices
[22:24] themselves, they do this is
[22:24] the calm the center screen
[22:25] shots, pictures of
[22:28] >> Ok, thank you.
[22:28] >> I will want to more about
[22:32] that, but that's great
[22:33] information. Next thing, the
[22:35] sides that we've say that we
[22:38] have that our policy is only
[22:39] to share in response to a law
[22:44] enforcement investigation.
[22:45] When oxen described the data
[22:46] sharing that they're
[22:46] developing, which is not in
[22:47] place yet. So it's a little
[22:48] hard for us to assess how it's
[22:51] gonna work, which does give me
[22:54] some pause again after fans
[22:55] will flock. They are saying
[22:57] that they're developing
[22:58] developing it to one-on-one
[22:59] where it would actually be
[23:00] that you get access to another
[23:01] jurisdiction as a user. Same
[23:04] is with flock, not
[23:04] case-by-case. So I think there
[23:05] MAY be a disconnect there
[23:08] about. What dpd says its
[23:09] policy would be about sharing
[23:11] versus how they are developing
[23:12] the technology. And I think we
[23:16] probably need to had that off
[23:17] before we enter into this
[23:18] contractual relationship
[23:19] because that's just, you know,
[23:20] if they're building the tech
[23:23] to jurisdictional sharing did
[23:24] rather case-by-case, then
[23:25] we're sort of cruising for
[23:27] that to the conflict with our
[23:31] policies. So that's that's I
[23:32] guess I'm curious if you have
[23:33] any talked about that with
[23:35] have thoughts about that.
[23:35] Given that they're developing
[23:38] that jurisdiction based
[23:39] sharing feature.
[23:40] >> can see that that the
[23:41] intent and I haven't reviewed
[23:44] the final contract yet, and
[23:45] feel free. But yeah,
[23:47] absolutely. There's an opt out
[23:49] by default built into the into
[23:50] the contract. So any new type
[23:51] of sharing technology that
[23:54] they're bringing to the table,
[23:54] it blocking out. We would have
[23:55] to explicitly popped into
[24:00] that. And in the mind, a big
[24:02] question mark for me is who
[24:03] makes the decision to opt into
[24:04] new technology and how now
[24:08] within the city I think that's
[24:09] still the conversation that,
[24:10] you know, that is actively
[24:11] unfolding between Council
[24:12] surveillance task force,
[24:15] mayor's office cetera. So,
[24:16] right, okay. And I would be
[24:17] really hasn't done for us to
[24:18] enter into this contract
[24:19] without that being sort of
[24:21] because I think I mean, again,
[24:21] we messed up by not knowing
[24:23] the on national network and we
[24:27] can do that So another
[24:28] question about is auditing. So
[24:32] as of now, our internal policy
[24:33] says that we will require
[24:37] officers to enter a case
[24:40] number a a parent. And what
[24:41] I've been told is that with
[24:44] tax on online with flock, the
[24:44] formatting will have to sort
[24:45] of be similar to a case number
[24:48] to be accepted. But it's not
[24:49] like it links to our records
[24:50] management system. So there's
[24:51] no way to be sure that it's a
[24:52] real case number rather than
[24:53] just letter letter. Whenever
[24:56] for like us and then when we
[24:58] asked when we talk about this
[25:01] before, I think the team told
[25:03] me that our auditing of the
[25:05] flock logs was focused on key
[25:05] word searches and spot checks
[25:10] and sensitive terms I want to
[25:12] know if tbd will be checking
[25:14] in a more meaningful way to
[25:17] see that no one's putting
[25:18] think case In other words,
[25:22] doing more than spot chance it
[25:23] does not seem that the systems
[25:25] have been you so much that it
[25:26] would be impractical to review
[25:27] all searches periodically. I
[25:29] think that would probably need
[25:30] to be ndp's and tell policy.
[25:33] So I'm curious what the intent
[25:34] is there because that seems
[25:34] like something we need to
[25:38] enforced by actually looking
[25:41] at that search absolutely and
[25:42] Councilmember United Capital
[25:42] yesterday. And I'm very open
[25:45] to any suggestions on how to
[25:45] increase, you know, the level
[25:48] of transparency you know, say
[25:49] MISTER And says so if there's
[25:51] something reasonable that we
[25:55] can do to increase the amount
[25:57] of And I'm totally open to
[25:57] discussing that. I think we're
[25:59] trying to strike a balance,
[26:00] though. Obviously, you know,
[26:02] we want to to do our due
[26:04] diligence, but we also want to
[26:05] make sure that we're engaging
[26:08] too much administrative burden
[26:11] a month on a monthly basis.
[26:14] Happy to additional
[26:15] conversations with anybody
[26:16] who's interested. Yeah, I
[26:17] mean, the knowing the number
[26:17] of searches that have been
[26:18] performing Flock would be
[26:19] helpful to understand what's
[26:23] realistic there. So I don't
[26:25] mean the question of whether
[26:26] dpd season need to rewrite its
[26:27] internal lpr policy to address
[26:28] some of these things because I
[26:32] think the way Axon works. What
[26:32] the policy said was always
[26:34] different from how flock
[26:35] actually worked. And we need
[26:38] with pauses to match how Axon
[26:39] actually works. And if so, I
[26:41] just want to fly that the
[26:42] Independent Monitor Austin
[26:43] last task force meeting. She
[26:44] could be given time to review
[26:45] that policy. So I'm wondering
[26:46] if there's an intent to revise
[26:50] it all. Clarify question here.
[26:52] So what aspects in regards to
[26:54] specifically how acts on
[26:55] platform works to addressed in
[26:58] the current policy? Well, I
[26:59] think I should say, I think
[27:03] the policy, for example, isn't
[27:04] specific enough about what
[27:05] we're based on the terms our
[27:08] input into the system. Lays
[27:09] out what the rules are, but it
[27:10] doesn't lay out kind of how we
[27:13] check for the rainfall. And
[27:14] then in addition, some of
[27:15] these sharing aspects, right
[27:16] probably need to be in the
[27:18] policy. Will share with
[27:20] another jurisdiction a way
[27:22] that not just with the
[27:23] technology does. I'm always
[27:26] happy to put, you know. We're
[27:27] always have to be flexible on
[27:28] the policy. I think the reason
[27:31] why, for example, a keyword
[27:31] terms are not explicitly laid
[27:33] out in policies were trying to
[27:34] stays flexible in as a nimble
[27:36] as possible. So that MAY be an
[27:38] stop. There's a procedure, for
[27:41] example. But if there's a new
[27:42] key word that that is
[27:43] presented this week that we
[27:45] need to start auditing for,
[27:46] you know, to me that makes
[27:47] more sense to put it in
[27:49] procedure and then indicated
[27:51] policy that we are following
[27:52] these monthly types of pot.
[27:55] Audit cadences doesn't sense.
[27:56] >> And because policy isn't
[27:57] updated a weekly basis, we try
[28:00] to stay nimble with it. But I
[28:01] can easily have my teams
[28:04] update. Written procedure
[28:07] known as quickly as often as
[28:08] needed.
[28:09] >> yeah, and I hear all I hear
[28:10] the openness to do this. And I
[28:13] just continue to concerned
[28:14] that we've been through a lot
[28:18] on this task force and made
[28:19] province. But we're not all
[28:20] the way through all of the
[28:20] things that need to be done.
[28:23] And so I worry about putting a
[28:24] contract through without
[28:25] having dpd policies and
[28:27] procedures in place without
[28:28] having it's an ordinance in
[28:29] place and those other things.
[28:30] And that's not for lack of
[28:31] everybody working very h#
[28:31] #
[28:32] #
[28:32] o#
[28:33] this is because you certainly
[28:36] haven't a lot of others have
[28:38] been. Another question is that
[28:39] I my understanding is that
[28:40] originally we were talking
[28:43] about 45 cameras on posts and
[28:44] then finds cameras that had
[28:46] greater capacity. And it's
[28:48] something that changed to 50
[28:50] cameras on post. Is that right
[28:51] is and is that still what the
[28:53] cap of the contractor fox
[28:55] okay. Those cameras I
[28:57] understand can do some live
[28:59] streaming. Can you describe
[29:00] church? So they are battery
[29:01] power cameras the Dodgers are.
[29:04] Then we charged by solar.
[29:05] >> So the live streaming
[29:06] capabilities in these cameras
[29:07] are very limited. Great so
[29:08] they can't live stream. 24 7
[29:11] has to be a very overt action
[29:13] on the part the user live
[29:13] stream from that camera. The
[29:17] footage is also not retained
[29:17] great. So inappropriate use
[29:18] would be, for example, the
[29:21] real time crime Center
[29:23] responding to an unfolding
[29:24] incident in progress and needs
[29:25] additional intelligence about,
[29:27] you know, that specific area.
[29:29] But like I said, they're
[29:31] battery devices. They're not
[29:32] designed to to operate in type
[29:37] live streaming mode. 24 7. So
[29:39] as soon as that operator
[29:40] stopped a live stream that it
[29:40] would return to its. That's
[29:41] the motive. Just capturing
[29:43] license plate images that's
[29:48] different So this is something
[29:50] I I've asked a few questions
[29:51] just trying to understand but
[29:52] it's fairly new is a concept
[29:54] to me of how I would even
[29:57] work. And does concern me that
[29:58] the idea someone in the real
[29:59] time crime center could open
[30:01] up a live stream and watch.
[30:01] >> Everything that's
[30:03] unfolding. That's new and
[30:05] different. And it's not
[30:05] something we've it's not about
[30:06] a lot in the task force from a
[30:08] policy point of either every
[30:11] you MAY be aware that the real
[30:12] time Crime Center does monitor
[30:15] a number of cameras throughout
[30:18] the city in order you provide
[30:20] better response and resource
[30:23] allocation to unfolding
[30:26] criminal incidents. To because
[30:28] of this conversation, I didn't
[30:30] know that And so it's sort of
[30:31] a fun. I mean, I'm not
[30:31] concerned about all those
[30:34] cameras to, unfortunately, I
[30:35] was not aware that that was
[30:37] something that law enforcement
[30:38] have the capacity to do. And
[30:42] that is a pretty intense form
[30:44] You know, COUNCILMAN I wasn't
[30:46] limited to question limit, but
[30:48] I'm gonna see at the record
[30:50] reflect that. I asked I'm very
[30:51] happy isn't an item. One more
[30:52] question and then we'll get
[30:52] you back you.
[30:55] >> Okay. That sounds good. So
[30:58] >> last question, then can
[30:59] tell us all of the different
[31:00] acts on products that the city
[31:03] uses. The I think it's such
[31:05] comprehensive list yesterday.
[31:06] Don't want really MISS
[31:07] Anything, generally speaking,
[31:10] I'm not trying to trip you
[31:11] body-worn cameras evidence dot
[31:13] com which are digital.
[31:16] >> Evidence storage repository
[31:17] few sis which is the real time
[31:21] Crime Center on platform. And
[31:27] then lpr. Can think of what
[31:27] also MAY be missing in a rerun
[31:28] cameras, which probably
[31:31] interview room Deo drones.
[31:34] Scotty was not part of the
[31:35] acts on coffee. I think just
[31:36] acquired them. And I don't I
[31:37] think they just told us that
[31:37] they told office everything
[31:40] yesterday. So I think they are
[31:41] now part of get an honest to
[31:42] is not a gotcha. I'm just
[31:44] giving the full list. So
[31:47] Taylor's evidence a comp uses,
[31:49] which I don't think we've ever
[31:50] been briefed on our have a
[31:54] great understanding But in the
[31:55] body warns and then the sky,
[31:57] And that's where I just think
[32:01] that all of us need to kind of
[32:02] spend our time because this is
[32:04] really different from fox and
[32:05] the way that all these
[32:07] different, you know, images
[32:08] and types of data it's just
[32:10] going be learning her Thank
[32:12] you, MR. Thank you. Counselor
[32:14] Perry counts cash then
[32:15] councilmember
[32:20] >> Thank Committee chair.
[32:21] Presentation troops. That's
[32:24] one piece of information You
[32:25] have big question from come in
[32:29] and Houston. It would be
[32:30] forthcoming is as far as the
[32:33] flock cameras go. Which crimes
[32:41] how many of Which crimes do
[32:42] the flock participate in
[32:45] solving? Someone will looking
[32:49] forward that. And sure
[32:50] COUNCILMAN's questions on.
[32:57] We'll live streaming and where
[32:58] talk comes from tyranny. Makes
[33:02] a little bit sharing only in
[33:04] response. 2 official
[33:05] investigation. Could tell me
[33:09] more about What you that
[33:11] investigation with 2? How
[33:15] would that work? And then
[33:19] sharing with another agency
[33:20] who then nation are with where
[33:23] the guardrails there.
[33:25] >> great question. Questions
[33:28] council member as far as the
[33:29] data goes, we have done some
[33:30] annual review. Some of our I
[33:31] didn't Teams have done some
[33:33] annual review of of the the
[33:35] flock data from the duration
[33:38] of the program up to about the
[33:40] 11th of last month. And can we
[33:43] do have some of that data.
[33:46] There's been over that that
[33:48] platform has helped contribute
[33:50] to over 500 arrests over 400
[33:51] recovered motor vehicles and
[33:54] over 60 firearms that have
[33:55] been recovered. So obviously
[33:57] quite a successful program in
[34:03] my view, as far as And as far
[34:06] as the sharing goes as related
[34:08] to an official criminal
[34:10] investigation. So what I what
[34:11] I told many people is that,
[34:12] you know, criminals often
[34:15] don't really respect borders.
[34:16] So so it's important that we
[34:17] collaborate with our
[34:18] neighboring jurisdictions and
[34:19] in solving crimes, specially
[34:21] patterned crimes and what not
[34:25] so oftentimes we approach
[34:26] agencies to thaw for
[34:26] assistance in investigating
[34:29] crimes. And sometimes we are
[34:30] approached and there's all
[34:31] sorts of different types of
[34:34] crimes. You know, for example,
[34:35] narcotics trafficking or human
[34:37] trafficking or robberies. You
[34:38] know, the Magic Metropolitan
[34:38] Area, auto theft, I think has
[34:41] has been, you know, a major
[34:42] one for our state over the
[34:45] last few years, right? So when
[34:46] we are approached by an
[34:49] external agency for help
[34:50] investigating an incident,
[34:51] typically that's referred
[34:52] either a supervisor or
[34:54] investigator in an
[34:55] investigative team and obtain
[34:56] additional information about
[34:57] what type of crime is being
[34:59] investigated. But that's
[35:01] really what the necessity What
[35:05] is the crime that's being
[35:06] investigated I as the
[35:06] presentation, you know,
[35:08] elaborate a little bit. It has
[35:10] to be something that's illegal
[35:11] in the state of Colorado. In
[35:12] order for us collaborate and
[35:16] share information with that
[35:19] agency. Show. Go back initial
[35:19] comment.
[35:24] >> aware of the overall number
[35:25] cases have been involved. But
[35:26] it's really relevant. What
[35:27] were the actual crimes that
[35:29] would that were solved? You
[35:33] know how meaningful? In the
[35:39] House we? More we open up the
[35:43] door to sharing the more it
[35:46] becomes flock. Other words,
[35:48] they might not be an actual
[35:54] nationwide system like, door,
[35:55] you open increases the
[36:00] opportunity for the. I I'm not
[36:04] comfortable I need more
[36:09] comfort around guardrails. To
[36:11] that sharing couple other I
[36:19] would hope. Contract or any
[36:22] contract in ballpark. It moves
[36:24] forward that we would have
[36:31] regular reports. To committee
[36:33] How it was unfolding. The last
[36:45] thing I wanted to say fact.
[36:47] Flock screams says d-conn
[36:49] gives me no confidence in
[36:53] time. GOD is not being
[37:01] reporting sure I very least.
[37:06] Recognizing cameras, whatever.
[37:08] Would should be what are taken
[37:10] The more I talk to who really
[37:17] understand world. We're down
[37:18] is is being collected from
[37:22] multiple sources constantly.
[37:28] Like what economy? So I just
[37:30] want for that. I thank Thank
[37:32] cast count Arkansas tears and
[37:34] comes from Thank you. MISTER
[37:37] >> Thank you for you know,
[37:38] providing us the briefings
[37:40] ahead of time for the
[37:41] conversations that we continue
[37:43] to have. The surveillance task
[37:44] also been having conversations
[37:46] out community and asked to
[37:47] attend different arno's to
[37:50] talk about specifically plot,
[37:50] but also about just
[37:51] surveillance tech and where
[37:53] things are with the task force
[37:55] and a lot of the questions
[37:55] I've received tons of
[37:56] questions from some of these
[38:00] artisan. They've submitted. Up
[38:01] to like 15 questions, some of
[38:02] them. And so there is some
[38:03] fall of only to have provide
[38:07] that I won't asked all the 15
[38:08] questions here, all of the
[38:09] various questions that you
[38:10] receive But I do want to get
[38:11] at some of these things to
[38:13] make sure that the public is
[38:14] is aware that we're all on the
[38:17] same page so can you tell us
[38:20] about the privately owned? I
[38:21] know that you can't
[38:25] necessarily. You're I want to
[38:25] make sure that everyone is
[38:27] aware that privately owned
[38:31] flock cameras will remain
[38:31] because they are not
[38:33] contracted by the city. Right?
[38:33] And so one of the questions I
[38:36] know I asked was will dpd have
[38:38] access to those cameras and
[38:42] data for investigations. I
[38:44] think ultimately the answer
[38:45] questions is yes. What it
[38:48] comes down
[38:50] >> Investigating any type of
[38:52] crime occurred, right? And if
[38:53] there is a private entity to
[38:53] capture some sort of evidence
[38:57] of that crime it's our duty to
[38:59] to obtain that evidence to
[39:00] make it part of our
[39:02] investigation and provided to
[39:05] prosecution. So the question
[39:06] marks that my team is still
[39:07] actively trying to chase down
[39:09] is is what that that access
[39:12] looks like. But I would
[39:13] related to any depth, other
[39:14] type of business that that has
[39:16] a private surveillance camera
[39:18] network. Great. Typically when
[39:19] you respond to that location
[39:21] and investigate a crime, if
[39:24] they have of that crime, we
[39:25] ask them to provide it to us
[39:28] of the people. Want thank you
[39:28] for that.
[39:30] >> With that said, I'm one of
[39:31] the things I didn't get to ask
[39:32] him because I forgot about it
[39:35] was drones that we were
[39:38] utilizing from plot that we
[39:41] had access to in a contract
[39:42] that we actually were paying
[39:43] for. It was they were being
[39:47] provided to us free of cost.
[39:48] Are exact contract still
[39:48] exist? Are we going to
[39:51] continue that contract?
[39:52] >> contract still exists, but
[39:53] that program has not gotten
[39:54] off the ground were So we have
[39:59] not flown in flat rate. Okay.
[40:01] >> And then how having me come
[40:02] due to the 21 day data
[40:03] retention. Where did that
[40:05] number come from? Because I
[40:06] know there's been a of
[40:06] conversation around data
[40:11] retention. How can we utilize
[40:14] to determine data retention
[40:16] and what we know and why
[40:16] because every day was kind of
[40:19] the standard with flock. Now
[40:21] we have a 21 day, which is
[40:22] less and I see it as a way
[40:23] like, okay, we're moving the
[40:26] needle a little bit. But is
[40:26] there a rhyme or reason as to
[40:29] why is 21
[40:30] >> I'm happy to take this
[40:32] Thanks for time. The question,
[40:33] COUNCILMAN, as you said, I
[40:34] think most jurisdictions have
[40:37] a 30 day retention policy.
[40:38] There's some that 14 days.
[40:39] There's a couple of examples
[40:40] where it's less than that 3 or
[40:41] 4 days. But by and large, the
[40:44] standard is 30 days. I think
[40:45] in discussions that we had and
[40:46] the task that we've heard
[40:49] community members as well, it
[40:50] wasn't something that we
[40:51] wanted to be proactive about.
[40:55] And it's a treat testing out.
[40:58] Is there big loss evidence
[41:02] between days? 22 to going
[41:06] below something like 14. Know
[41:06] the Denver Police Department
[41:07] to look some of the homicide
[41:12] cases where license role in
[41:14] 2025. Look to when in the kind
[41:18] timeline of the case that
[41:19] evidence became relevant. I
[41:22] mean, it was pretty spread you
[41:25] know, immediately within
[41:27] minutes up to and including
[41:30] ending 2020 or 30 days with
[41:31] the lion share of the evidence
[41:32] found that it was between like
[41:36] 3 in 20 days. And so I think
[41:37] it was kind of clustered in
[41:39] that period. We want to still
[41:40] make sure that we were being
[41:42] responsive in reducing it by
[41:44] some but not by going too this
[41:52] point. Okay. I
[41:53] >> vast a couple of times for
[41:54] just like the data on that. I
[41:55] think so. My colleagues have
[41:59] also asked for wanting to just
[42:01] better understand everything
[42:02] that you just said. Don't know
[42:03] that her a level of that
[42:06] detail before this meeting and
[42:09] I would still love to see it.
[42:12] Eyes to see like how that been
[42:13] caused by the other piece that
[42:17] I have is on has released
[42:19] data. So when the evidence dot
[42:21] com, readings it's happening
[42:25] right of Has there ever been
[42:28] any leaks from evidence dot
[42:31] com we're aware Not to my
[42:33] knowledge, okay has so our
[42:34] data has never been
[42:35] compromised in any way in the
[42:40] past it's okay. Then the last
[42:41] couple questions that I have
[42:43] is around access to the who
[42:44] will have access to those
[42:47] audit. The platform,
[42:50] administrators in command
[42:50] staff.
[42:54] >> And myself, obviously
[42:55] access. We also provide that
[42:56] data to data analyst and
[42:59] director safety's office.
[43:00] There are sensitivities around
[43:02] that data because typically a
[43:03] can contain Pei and receive
[43:09] just enough. It's It does
[43:10] personally identifiable
[43:12] information and just this
[43:13] information.
[43:14] >> When it all continuing.
[43:17] Yeah, I because personal
[43:18] identifying information
[43:19] because license plates have
[43:19] been identified by the state
[43:23] by state law. Those are
[43:24] identified as person
[43:25] identifying from just like
[43:26] when we treated with with due
[43:27] regard because of the
[43:31] sensitivity of of the rent.
[43:34] City Council or the public be
[43:35] able to have any access at any
[43:38] form of level of the results
[43:41] of the audience we have
[43:41] provided in response to
[43:43] requests redacted data sets
[43:44] that show various usage sign I
[43:46] don't have any objections to
[43:47] that. But just understanding
[43:47] that we have we have an
[43:48] obligation to redact sensitive
[43:52] data from okay that's all I
[43:55] have for Thank you, Thank you.
[43:56] Cause Gonzales from thing's
[43:58] for sure.
[44:02] >> Thank you for intentionally
[44:03] going about designers contract
[44:06] to address most of them a
[44:07] year. Concerns about the way
[44:08] the system has been configured
[44:12] before. Closed system
[44:17] accessible only by We're going
[44:18] to take only which initiated
[44:25] by no, they are training. No
[44:31] National Network. Like that
[44:32] terrifying the question that
[44:38] council just ask other private
[44:38] flock cameras its to its
[44:39] systems for the icrc. A lot of
[44:41] them in my district after
[44:42] shopping centers, one in the
[44:42] shopping center where council
[44:44] offices. There's a couple of
[44:51] them actually. We will have no
[44:51] self initiated. That's matter
[44:52] is we won't be able log into
[44:53] the flock system. See those
[44:55] prior cameras. When relied on
[45:00] moves. Shopping center
[45:03] management that the access to
[45:05] provide photo ultimately it is
[45:07] the private entity that
[45:11] controls that have our ability
[45:12] to what that sharing mechanism
[45:13] looks like. My team is still
[45:15] trying to figure that out for
[45:15] one stuck on our current
[45:18] contract lapses. I don't know.
[45:19] >> Have specific answers in
[45:20] that regard. But I'm happy to
[45:20] share with looks like this we
[45:26] have information we have
[45:28] tasers and body cameras
[45:29] provided by accident in the
[45:31] most recent contract. One of
[45:32] the significant upgrades was
[45:35] when an officer.
[45:38] >> removes the Taser from that
[45:39] holder automatically activates
[45:44] the body cam. So doesn't have
[45:46] to do 2 things body cams not
[45:48] already activated for one
[45:51] reason or another. Is there
[45:56] any interactivity? Between the
[45:59] flock between the Axon cameras
[45:59] and then the other acts on
[46:05] device. Solis stand alone.
[46:07] Internal. It doesn't go
[46:08] anywhere else. Among other
[46:09] devices, halo cameras or
[46:11] anything like
[46:13] >> Right now it is
[46:14] stand-alone. There is so
[46:15] there's obviously an evidence
[46:17] dot com integration. That's
[46:18] where the gators essential for
[46:21] was gone. And there's a few
[46:22] says integration to that
[46:23] allows the camera locations to
[46:24] be viewed the few says map.
[46:26] And then in those cases in the
[46:26] real time crime centers
[46:29] responding to an active
[46:32] incident, they could act to be
[46:32] live streamed uses strike. And
[46:35] Bernard Live streaming we
[46:35] asked the same thing in the
[46:40] task force meeting last week a
[46:41] chair when the real time Crime
[46:41] Center says we need to see
[46:43] what's happening there right
[46:44] now.
[46:44] >> We don't have a halo
[46:47] camera, but there's a match on
[46:49] camera the are stream from
[46:51] that camera. That cameras no
[46:52] longer taking photographs of
[46:54] vehicles passing by. It is
[46:55] being used on a large tree
[46:58] moment taking photos. Is
[46:58] correct?
[46:59] >> I don't know that those 2
[47:01] modes are mutually exclusive.
[47:02] I My team is still trying
[47:06] to figure that But happy to
[47:07] provide that information says
[47:09] we to know that and we do have
[47:13] someone from acts online. I
[47:15] have all and much in show. We
[47:17] for that person answer that
[47:18] question. Joe has promoted. So
[47:24] to preserve you don't mind.
[47:25] >> I'm only human while you're
[47:27] doing Want to can council
[47:29] PRESIDENT Pro Tempore Mayor
[47:30] Council PRESIDENT Putin. If
[47:31] you want to join the queue,
[47:32] please communicate through
[47:34] instant message.
[47:38] We produce a lot of snow and
[47:43] generally it's been promoted.
[47:45] >> Part going here I introduce
[47:46] yourself your title and that
[47:48] customer Flynn has a question
[47:49] for
[47:51] >> It's my name is Joe. I am a
[47:54] vice PRESIDENT Of sales tax
[47:55] on. If you wouldn't mind
[47:56] repeating a question.
[48:01] >> Sure, when Cameron
[48:02] activated for live streaming
[48:05] for one reason or another.
[48:05] Does it continue to take
[48:06] photographs as well as large
[48:07] streaming through that same
[48:10] device?
[48:11] >> Yes, it does. So the device
[48:13] itself actually has 2 centers
[48:15] on it. What is dedicated to
[48:16] the alpr portion. The other
[48:17] one is dedicated to live
[48:20] stream.
[48:25] >> Ok, thank doesn't provide.
[48:26] Words through the live stream
[48:30] of any vehicle or does that
[48:30] function resigned? Only with
[48:35] the photographs.
[48:38] >> Well, all in terms all the
[48:40] learning back into Arkansas
[48:41] system to protect fails. The
[48:42] are that the license plate
[48:47] this. The the alerts come from
[48:49] the photographs, not the
[48:53] video.
[48:54] >> Thank a couple questions
[48:54] that have come to me answers
[48:59] for these devices are do not
[48:59] use facial recognition. Is
[49:04] that correct? Okay. Was asked
[49:07] that question. Constituents.
[49:08] Putting pictures on the backs
[49:11] cars. I don't workspaces with
[49:12] being involved America. I have
[49:21] to ask. Alert for him learn.
[49:22] Versus a search of the
[49:22] databases are 2 different uses
[49:28] of the system. Wear them.
[49:32] Camper trailers. There is
[49:33] child abduction and number of
[49:34] vehicle that's involved in
[49:37] passes by a camera alert is
[49:40] sent its verified by some
[49:41] other method before vehicle
[49:45] stops authorized. Does that
[49:48] automatically generate case
[49:49] number with your does it
[49:55] simply a cad number? The
[49:56] officer investigator responded
[49:56] to that incident would have to
[49:57] generate a cad number that
[49:58] eventually become the report
[49:59] number for that.
[50:03] >> that's automatic. So the
[50:04] hot list so that the platform
[50:06] is capable of maintaining a
[50:07] hot list of vehicles that, you
[50:07] know, for example, a stolen
[50:10] motor vehicle or it's just the
[50:14] example to you straight. But
[50:15] when a littler has received an
[50:17] officer to take action on that
[50:19] and create a system they would
[50:21] there have to create a cad
[50:23] number and put in record
[50:25] number officer generate is the
[50:26] system automatically generate
[50:27] doesn't automatically generate
[50:29] some of use. More immediate
[50:30] example that a child abduction
[50:31] because obviously there be
[50:34] earlier report already I hit
[50:38] and run and you got a call. It
[50:44] was a white Ford Bronco with
[50:46] but what I want for front it
[50:47] had a partial plate number,
[50:49] some signage. And hard to
[50:51] watch camera hits on that. And
[50:51] that's an alert. So that would
[50:53] be that would just generate a
[50:53] cad number.
[50:56] >> As soon as there's no case
[50:57] number, as soon as that's
[50:58] reported to Denver, 9-1-1, can
[51:00] generated right then.
[51:03] >> All of the investigative
[51:04] work and data collection
[51:07] evidence collection can
[51:08] centralize around cold water
[51:10] to pull its ok? Can you just
[51:14] describe what to catch them?
[51:15] It's a computer aided dispatch
[51:17] and it's just it's an
[51:18] electronic system that that
[51:19] Denver, 9, one uses track
[51:20] incidents and to deploy
[51:22] resources to those incidents.
[51:24] And whenever there's an
[51:24] incident that's received in
[51:26] the system that generates that
[51:30] unique number that then
[51:31] essentially precipitate all of
[51:32] that, all the data collection
[51:36] and responses. 4 for so that
[51:38] that creates portable trail.
[51:41] With full searches that are
[51:45] connected to that one
[51:47] incident. Yes, an officer gets
[51:48] a lead a month same number 12
[51:49] 20 days later, they be able to
[51:52] search system.
[51:54] >> are your final question?
[51:56] Because we're sliding one more
[51:58] and thank you asking happens.
[51:59] Separate case numbers while
[52:02] playing out for him do monthly
[52:05] audits under this contract.
[52:06] Yes, sir, will it be available
[52:08] to You mentioned that you
[52:10] would have access your data
[52:11] analyst where City Council be
[52:13] able to request seeing just
[52:17] want to logs. What I want to
[52:18] see license plate numbers. I
[52:20] don't any need to look at But
[52:23] the crimes, the cabs, senator.
[52:25] >> They do have to be rejected
[52:27] because of the sensitive
[52:29] nature of the certainty that
[52:30] know personally fine-tune the
[52:32] nation. I don't want to
[52:34] compromise. And then typically
[52:35] that's why we that's one of
[52:38] the reasons why provide that
[52:39] data is sent the director
[52:39] safety's office, the data
[52:41] analyst there. So although I
[52:42] have no issues with it, I
[52:44] would need to to discuss with
[52:44] the team. I don't know what
[52:48] kind of a lift that is for
[52:53] them to do that on suspect,
[52:54] there will be interest because
[52:57] going be theirs. And
[52:58] councilmember Taurus.
[52:58] >> you chair, thank you for
[53:01] coming forward with this.
[53:02] Despite that, we'll need for
[53:06] council. But I really
[53:08] appreciate attempt to have a
[53:09] better transparency and
[53:10] relationship when it comes to
[53:14] this as far as their attention
[53:16] period going back to council
[53:17] Putin and his question around
[53:21] the 21 days and data behind
[53:22] that I still and not
[53:25] understanding. How we got to
[53:26] 21 days and what is the
[53:28] difference between a vehicle
[53:31] that has actually been flagged
[53:31] and just anyone that's driving
[53:35] around the city.
[53:37] >> So happy work dpd team to
[53:38] provide a little bit more
[53:42] context on. We arrived at the
[53:44] 21 day. Number. We looked at a
[53:47] pretty small sample size cases
[53:52] in 2025 and then look when in
[53:52] the process, license plate
[53:53] reader system became involved
[53:56] are providing relevant and
[53:58] we're to balance not
[54:00] losing a bunch of cases where
[54:00] provided relative relevant
[54:04] evidence. We'll also be
[54:05] responsive to the concerns
[54:06] that we've heard from
[54:07] councilmembers community
[54:09] around. The longer you hold
[54:12] that the longer it's possible
[54:13] that someone gains access to
[54:13] the system and use it. So
[54:14] those are the 2 kind of
[54:17] bouncing factors that we're
[54:19] trying to strikes here in 21
[54:22] days felt least first attempt
[54:24] to strike to strike. And but
[54:25] think it's an ongoing
[54:25] conversation. Happened at dove
[54:27] into a little bit more detail
[54:28] there.
[54:32] >> And how about when we are
[54:32] searching for a particular
[54:33] vehicle? How long are we
[54:34] holding on to that data
[54:38] investigations open? Is it
[54:39] past that?
[54:41] >> that already obtained
[54:42] evidence for specific case,
[54:43] typically what would happen is
[54:45] we will take those images and
[54:46] we would attack them
[54:46] specifically. So the system's
[54:47] a little bit different. Just
[54:49] 40 resides in dot com. So
[54:50] socially would have to
[54:51] preserve it for that case
[54:52] because then it becomes
[54:55] evidence for that case that
[54:56] evidence was be retained as
[54:56] long as necessary for the
[55:01] disposition of case. Outside
[55:03] of specific specific evidence
[55:04] collected for a case that 20
[55:06] one-day retention period. But
[55:09] on a medic, the purge and he
[55:09] did
[55:10] >> And that something we will
[55:13] see specified in the contract
[55:15] with Axon?
[55:17] >> The 21 day or the All of
[55:19] Yeah. So the purging will
[55:22] absolutely part of the
[55:24] contract there will discussion
[55:26] of the retention policy. I
[55:27] don't know if it'll it's a 21
[55:27] days in the contract, but it
[55:31] will make clear. But it says
[55:33] the city who are the ones who
[55:34] set whatever that number is.
[55:35] And so it's within our
[55:35] discretion to that 21 days
[55:39] higher or lower.
[55:40] >> I guess my concern there is
[55:41] that we can change that any
[55:42] time without council and we
[55:45] want him be necessarily need
[55:48] to be informed. And so I'm
[55:52] just curious what that process
[55:53] also curious about that. And
[55:55] who is going to be approving
[55:56] that invitation. And will that
[56:00] be?
[56:00] >> There's no intention right
[56:03] now to move forward with any
[56:05] of those directly to sharing
[56:06] relationships. I know you
[56:07] know, I mentioned earlier,
[56:08] there's some of these
[56:09] conversations are still
[56:12] evolving. And so I think, you
[56:13] know, that conversation have
[56:15] to be had with council with
[56:17] mayor's office and dpd
[56:18] collectively to forward. That
[56:22] were something that we wanted
[56:22] to do just Just to reiterate
[56:25] on that at this point, it will
[56:28] be only Denver police a couple
[56:30] of other person news. Another
[56:31] safety personnel access to.
[56:34] This the city of Denver,
[56:35] >> And then what is the
[56:35] hickory and accuracy of the
[56:39] systems?
[56:40] >> I have a specific number
[56:42] the axe on representative on
[56:44] the call can speak to that You
[56:45] know, do you buy step back
[56:48] for?
[56:51] >> also in terms the accuracy
[56:52] of the system. All of that
[56:55] depends on real world weather
[56:56] conditions. But what we've
[56:58] seen in kind of all weather
[56:59] conditions is were upwards of
[57:02] about 98% accuracy in terms of
[57:03] the capture 8 and then
[57:05] accuracy of that capture,
[57:07] meaning they're 2 metrics that
[57:08] you look at when a car goes by
[57:10] how many times do capture car.
[57:11] And then when you do capture
[57:13] it, the accuracy of that read,
[57:14] were both and that kind of
[57:21] area.
[57:22] >> the with the foxes staff,
[57:22] you can also search for a
[57:23] vehicle with a scratch. On the
[57:27] phone for and other details
[57:29] using ai. Will the system be
[57:30] doing that as well? Or is it
[57:30] strictly license plate
[57:35] information?
[57:36] >> That system our system does
[57:38] have the ability to search for
[57:39] things to characteristics of
[57:42] the vehicle.
[57:43] >> And will he having that is
[57:45] part of our system with the
[57:49] city of acts have is my last
[57:52] question. Provides just public
[57:53] transparency portal. What does
[57:54] that mean? Where does that
[57:57] look like? And how will we
[57:58] provide transparency to the
[57:59] public without jeopardizing
[58:03] sensitive information? Was for
[58:10] you. As a w.
[58:11] >> If absolutely sure the
[58:13] trial transparency portal that
[58:17] we have allows agencies
[58:19] publish how they're using any
[58:21] of axons technology to the
[58:22] public. It is a tool that we
[58:23] provide through the few says
[58:24] platform and so allows it
[58:27] allows you to say what are the
[58:28] technologies that you have,
[58:29] any sharing agreements that
[58:29] you have with other police
[58:31] agencies or entities and then
[58:34] also an ability for community
[58:37] members to there, cameras or
[58:41] register any cameras too.
[58:43] Existing kind of use its
[58:44] network, meaning called a
[58:45] private cameras that you
[58:46] previously talked about on the
[58:48] fox Network. You can also do
[58:48] similar things issues that
[58:53] work as a private individual.
[58:54] >> Thank. Thank Thank you.
[58:55] Committee chair. Thank you.
[58:55] Council Roby, there's
[58:56] Councilmember Torres. Thank
[58:59] you. MISTER Chair I want to go
[59:00] back to COUNCILMAN Parodies
[59:03] question about the ops manual
[59:04] because there are several
[59:05] references to flock in the
[59:06] Alps manual. So assuming you
[59:10] have to change that 2. We
[59:13] references and replace with.
[59:16] The name. This system meant
[59:17] your potential? Absolutely.
[59:21] Yes. And the policy itself I I
[59:23] review routinely. I think they
[59:23] biweekly with the city
[59:24] attorney's office cannot far
[59:26] from the truth. But is pretty
[59:30] robust generalizing lpr
[59:32] systems. You know, just
[59:33] generally speaking. So yes, we
[59:35] do intend to go through and do
[59:38] some slight amendments because
[59:39] explicitly it doesn't
[59:42] reference live streaming and
[59:45] any regulations around that
[59:47] when then rely the guidance
[59:49] under Halo. And we do have
[59:51] some robust policy controls
[59:52] Rican regards to all of
[59:53] technologies that are used
[59:54] utilized by the real time
[59:56] crime center as well. So yes,
[59:58] it would because it is a
[59:59] camera device. Well, would say
[1:00:02] that, though. And updated
[1:00:06] policy language. If that's
[1:00:09] tool absent provides. That
[1:00:09] there would be even the
[1:00:12] reference to the sections or
[1:00:16] something else. Because that
[1:00:17] just learned about that that
[1:00:19] side of that technology here.
[1:00:20] So just wanted something to
[1:00:24] speak to that. I think that's
[1:00:27] absolutely did call out. I All
[1:00:27] of you that with the city
[1:00:29] attorney's office was once
[1:00:30] more to just make sure that
[1:00:31] that if it's not in there
[1:00:32] already, that we could
[1:00:33] something that explicitly
[1:00:36] addresses that concern the
[1:00:39] real time crime center how
[1:00:43] long does that then? Like a
[1:00:44] dedicated team and how many
[1:00:48] people make it up? So it's
[1:00:50] quite a few years now. I think
[1:00:52] I think the halo cameras go
[1:00:53] back to the dnc that we
[1:00:57] previously hosted. So
[1:00:58] >> doing that math in my head.
[1:00:58] It's been it's 20 years been
[1:01:02] quite long time. The author, a
[1:01:03] strength real time. Crime
[1:01:05] centers is 12. Far below that
[1:01:13] currently. But yeah, okay. I
[1:01:15] don't think I have additional
[1:01:17] questions. Only interest that
[1:01:22] I have as as we just utilize
[1:01:23] more frequently, do want to
[1:01:25] better understand what impact
[1:01:29] that has on redistribution of
[1:01:33] officers and budget
[1:01:35] consequences. I feel like we
[1:01:37] should be creating more
[1:01:38] efficient systems where we
[1:01:40] need fewer people interacting
[1:01:44] or we're trying to address
[1:01:46] some of gap that we experience
[1:01:47] with either response times or
[1:01:50] something like that and this
[1:01:53] is just the sense that I feel
[1:01:54] it MAY not be real in terms of
[1:01:58] numbers or data. We things to
[1:02:03] the side of budget and
[1:02:04] technology. I'm concerned that
[1:02:06] we're not being very judicious
[1:02:06] about. Where does that then
[1:02:09] relieve us of publication to
[1:02:14] keep putting money in our
[1:02:14] personnel and when we continue
[1:02:18] to both tolls and money to the
[1:02:20] side of the budget. But I can
[1:02:21] bring that up another time.
[1:02:25] Thank you. Thank you.
[1:02:30] Councilmember I have a second
[1:02:32] that beef before we jump 2
[1:02:35] quick First on year.
[1:02:38] >> Policy and procedures
[1:02:39] manual. Is there a reason why
[1:02:41] we're not think not stick to
[1:02:46] carriers, wiser name of that
[1:02:46] carrier. Less than an We're
[1:02:51] going to be going think that's
[1:02:53] a good I was actually thinking
[1:02:55] about that as we were just
[1:02:56] discussing, removing flock and
[1:02:56] then putting in an Exxon. I
[1:02:58] think the reason that it's in
[1:02:59] there now
[1:03:00] >> is to differentiate the
[1:03:01] unique characteristics of the
[1:03:05] various platforms that we use.
[1:03:05] So I will definitely bring
[1:03:06] that up with the city
[1:03:08] attorney's office and see if
[1:03:09] we can. You just make a pass
[1:03:11] from
[1:03:15] >> One of 13 council members,
[1:03:15] my strong recommendations that
[1:03:16] were not flipping names an
[1:03:19] opera Miles that we are having
[1:03:24] procedures specific 2 systems
[1:03:25] and abilities And means
[1:03:27] because then you're going
[1:03:29] continue updating whatever
[1:03:30] basis. That is just my
[1:03:31] recommendation. So would love
[1:03:33] to hear city attorney's
[1:03:35] perspective.
[1:03:38] >> I have I have continued
[1:03:39] concerns. West.
[1:03:40] >> Surveillance cameras near
[1:03:42] predict reproductive all
[1:03:44] centers. And I would like you
[1:03:45] to describe once what controls
[1:03:48] that we have as we commission
[1:03:51] on cameras from the last
[1:03:51] carrier to now this carrier.
[1:03:55] What? Controls that? We have
[1:03:59] to ensure that new cameras,
[1:04:02] our place places that provide
[1:04:03] details folks going in and out
[1:04:07] really ensuring that they have
[1:04:08] safety, security and privacy
[1:04:11] with going to reproductive
[1:04:12] health centers.
[1:04:12] >> Yeah, thank you,
[1:04:14] COUNCILMAN. I we've had this
[1:04:15] conversation a couple times.
[1:04:15] We've also been talking with
[1:04:16] some of the organizations in
[1:04:20] that space I know dpd is
[1:04:21] currently working on kind of
[1:04:23] the list of criteria that
[1:04:25] they're going to use for
[1:04:27] determining where these camera
[1:04:28] placements we're happy to sit
[1:04:30] down with any councilmember
[1:04:30] and have discussions about
[1:04:31] either in your district or
[1:04:34] city at large where camera
[1:04:35] placements going kind of the
[1:04:39] feedback there in a couple of
[1:04:40] things that we've talked about
[1:04:44] as it relates to putting that
[1:04:46] certain sensitive locations,
[1:04:47] right? As we've already talked
[1:04:49] about, these are facing the
[1:04:50] public right of way right
[1:04:51] there facing public streets to
[1:04:52] face in the parking lot. It's
[1:04:53] not facing a specific
[1:04:55] building. It's getting the
[1:04:55] image is going through and
[1:04:57] down the public street. So
[1:05:00] that's part of it. The
[1:05:01] reduction in the retention of
[1:05:06] the number of days policy is
[1:05:06] son, Parker, reflection of
[1:05:07] some of the concerns have been
[1:05:10] raised about the potential for
[1:05:12] improper uses around
[1:05:14] reproductive healthcare
[1:05:14] investigations and there's
[1:05:15] going to be there's already
[1:05:16] policies and exist with be
[1:05:19] explicit language in the
[1:05:21] contract about the fact that
[1:05:23] we have shield laws in the
[1:05:24] state and that none of this
[1:05:25] can be used for the purposes
[1:05:26] of those types of
[1:05:29] investigations. So it's the
[1:05:30] balance of the concerns that
[1:05:33] have been raised. Also
[1:05:34] recognizing that a lot of the
[1:05:35] sensitive locations, those
[1:05:36] type of facilities, hospitals
[1:05:40] and places, those are also
[1:05:40] places that targeted for
[1:05:44] attack other. Criminal
[1:05:45] conduct. And so weighing those
[1:05:46] factors as part of what we've
[1:05:48] been discussing. But I'm
[1:05:50] certainly chat about the
[1:05:51] camera placement that you any
[1:05:52] other member who would like
[1:05:59] to. Thank you so much. In the
[1:06:00] second round councilmember
[1:06:01] parity visas tears comes from
[1:06:01] Cashman and Council member
[1:06:04] Fletcher.
[1:06:05] >> and I apologize. I just our
[1:06:11] council member Amanda Sawyer,
[1:06:12] and you didn't go first round.
[1:06:14] So if you don't mind jumping
[1:06:14] in and don't go to second.
[1:06:16] Great. Thank you so much.
[1:06:18] MISTER Chair. Really person
[1:06:18] and I want to say thank you
[1:06:21] for hearing the council's
[1:06:22] concerns about.
[1:06:24] >> You a lot of the different
[1:06:24] things that we've already
[1:06:27] talked about here and being
[1:06:27] responsive to them. I really
[1:06:31] appreciate it. We have been in
[1:06:31] situations previously where
[1:06:33] we've had concerns like this
[1:06:33] and haven't been responded to
[1:06:36] with such thorough and
[1:06:37] extensive conversation and
[1:06:39] research and discussions. So
[1:06:43] thank really appreciate Wanted
[1:06:46] to ask about the 55 cameras
[1:06:47] that are coming in in this
[1:06:48] contract. So right now we have
[1:06:52] 111 flock cameras. This more
[1:06:56] than cuts that in half. What
[1:06:58] does that mean for kind of
[1:06:59] system in general and the
[1:07:03] impacts that I have? I think
[1:07:05] we're going to have to and we
[1:07:07] fully anticipate to drain into
[1:07:08] the collection phase as we
[1:07:09] roll out this platform to kind
[1:07:11] of see where.
[1:07:11] >> That plans to on. If you
[1:07:13] want to see details in that
[1:07:15] regard. But essentially, we do
[1:07:16] know that they're, you know,
[1:07:17] reducing the number of lpr
[1:07:19] devices will have some sort of
[1:07:20] impact. We're not exactly sure
[1:07:21] where that impactful will
[1:07:23] land, but we're definitely be
[1:07:24] collecting data as much as
[1:07:27] possible in that regard. Is
[1:07:28] that does that make sense? I
[1:07:29] think so. I mean, I guess I'm
[1:07:32] I'm asking
[1:07:35] >> this we have seen
[1:07:36] significant success with 111
[1:07:40] cameras are we going to be
[1:07:42] able to have that same level
[1:07:45] of success with less cameras?
[1:07:46] I think there will be an
[1:07:47] impact. And I just I just
[1:07:48] don't I can't quantify what
[1:07:48] that impact will be at this
[1:07:53] plane.
[1:07:54] >> think
[1:07:55] >> that that's goes back to
[1:07:56] their earlier discussion of
[1:07:56] why tpd is coming up with
[1:08:00] this. This kind of list of
[1:08:02] parameters for determining
[1:08:03] where cameras are most needed
[1:08:03] across the city and then
[1:08:07] obviously working with council
[1:08:08] members to have that further
[1:08:11] discussion around the
[1:08:12] placement. But it's it'll be a
[1:08:14] little bit of an iterative
[1:08:15] process along with the 21 day.
[1:08:19] Retention period rate is to
[1:08:21] How much of a loss evidence
[1:08:23] does that create? Because it's
[1:08:24] significant not similar with
[1:08:25] the reduction cameras. It's
[1:08:27] something that will be
[1:08:28] tracking certainly.
[1:08:30] >> Ok, so are you kind of
[1:08:31] looking at this that as a
[1:08:37] pilot to see what that?
[1:08:40] >> loss what that impact will
[1:08:41] be, what all of the different
[1:08:42] things that we just talked
[1:08:43] about like is that are you
[1:08:46] sort of? From a management
[1:08:47] perspective? Are you looking
[1:08:50] at this as a as an opportunity
[1:08:52] to pilot a different
[1:08:55] technology that works better
[1:08:56] given all of our concerns. And
[1:08:57] given the community's concerns
[1:08:59] about data, retention, cetera,
[1:09:03] that vision here.
[1:09:05] >> Absolutely. That's
[1:09:07] different aspect because this
[1:09:07] is a different platform Levy's
[1:09:09] previously. For example, the
[1:09:11] retention period is, as Tim
[1:09:12] said, is being reduced. So I
[1:09:12] think there's there's
[1:09:13] definitely different types of
[1:09:16] metrics that we're going to be
[1:09:16] monitoring and capturing to to
[1:09:19] kind of judge the efficacy.
[1:09:20] And I think, you know, as this
[1:09:20] new platform rules out, that's
[1:09:24] going take some time. This is
[1:09:24] new platform rules out. You
[1:09:27] know, we can start comparing
[1:09:28] what that what the numbers
[1:09:28] look like to the previous
[1:09:34] platform. Really appreciate
[1:09:37] that. I I will just follow
[1:09:37] Councilmember Cashman's
[1:09:38] requests that U.S. Keep us
[1:09:40] updated on what this looks
[1:09:41] like after.
[1:09:42] >> You know, assuming the
[1:09:43] contract goes through after
[1:09:44] certain number of months,
[1:09:46] maybe quarterly kind of go
[1:09:51] over what that looks like
[1:09:53] really appreciate that. I will
[1:09:55] say thank you for delaying
[1:09:56] this to a date certain because
[1:09:56] I don't feel comfortable
[1:10:00] voting on this contract and
[1:10:01] tell they see the contract
[1:10:04] itself. And the reason for
[1:10:06] that is because task force has
[1:10:10] been talking. Lyle about
[1:10:11] creating an ordinance that
[1:10:15] would manage data sharing and
[1:10:17] privacy are across all
[1:10:18] technology platforms that
[1:10:20] doesn't exist at this moment.
[1:10:26] I hope it does But what that
[1:10:28] means for real world
[1:10:28] implications is that
[1:10:31] guardrails have to exist in
[1:10:32] the contract. And that's why I
[1:10:35] feel like I cam vote to move
[1:10:36] this out of committee until I
[1:10:38] see the contract because the
[1:10:39] only place these guardrails
[1:10:44] exist the contract. So really
[1:10:45] appreciate you getting that.
[1:10:47] That to us soon as possible.
[1:10:48] And thanks again for hearing
[1:10:50] us and for doing only work on
[1:10:54] Thank you.
[1:10:54] >> Thank you. Councilmember
[1:10:55] And then Councilmember gets
[1:10:59] off terrorists and let's start
[1:11:02] there thank you, MISTER Do we
[1:11:03] have an axon representative
[1:11:04] available to be promoted or is
[1:11:06] he he great. Thank you.
[1:11:08] >> So something I didn't get a
[1:11:09] chance to ask. And to
[1:11:10] Beijing's, I've had with you
[1:11:12] all that. I appreciate all
[1:11:15] that time spent how a tax on
[1:11:19] handle executive order or a
[1:11:20] situation where the federal
[1:11:22] government sent you a
[1:11:23] subpoena. You sent it to the
[1:11:23] role. The jurisdiction is the
[1:11:25] owner of the data. But the
[1:11:27] federal government then took
[1:11:28] Exxon to court trying to get
[1:11:33] essentially all of your data.
[1:11:34] >> In in a scenario like that
[1:11:35] is something that we have a
[1:11:36] legal team where we would
[1:11:38] fight against That's kind of
[1:11:42] as far as I. And able to
[1:11:43] probably speak to that. But I
[1:11:44] get more specifics in terms of
[1:11:45] like what we would actually do
[1:11:46] in a matter like that. But
[1:11:50] Lilly under contract, we send
[1:11:51] the did send the foi request a
[1:11:52] review because we do not have
[1:11:55] access and it is not our data.
[1:11:56] >> Something that we talked a
[1:11:57] little bit everything in our
[1:11:59] second briefing yesterday was
[1:11:59] that also impacts on has an
[1:12:02] ethics board around ai looking
[1:12:04] into a little more actually
[1:12:05] saw that entire board resigned
[1:12:06] in 2022. So I We're talking
[1:12:08] about a new word. It was
[1:12:09] replaced. That resignation was
[1:12:11] pretty concerning to me. Can
[1:12:15] you talk about whether Axon
[1:12:15] did anything to address the
[1:12:16] concerns that led the entire
[1:12:20] board resign due to the
[1:12:23] announcement some time not his
[1:12:27] quick to and then also use
[1:12:27] surveillance cameras with
[1:12:30] real-time streaming, which is
[1:12:31] exactly what we're talking to
[1:12:32] me what it acts. In response
[1:12:35] to that words as a nation of
[1:12:36] 2022.
[1:12:37] >> That's one of probably have
[1:12:38] to follow up on to get more
[1:12:38] specifics about that
[1:12:39] particular piece. But all fall
[1:12:42] on that.
[1:12:42] >> Okay. I would appreciate
[1:12:43] that because I wasn't aware of
[1:12:49] it is concerning for dvd. Is
[1:12:50] there any other software of
[1:12:51] all the different tools that
[1:12:51] you have available in the real
[1:12:54] time crime center?
[1:12:55] >> That has facial recognition
[1:12:56] capability. Even if you're not
[1:13:03] necessarily using No, to my
[1:13:04] knowledge. I'm I'm concerned
[1:13:07] that even if the even of axons
[1:13:09] over them is not building in
[1:13:11] facial recognition, that live
[1:13:12] streaming capability leads to
[1:13:13] the possibility of fake
[1:13:14] official recognition by
[1:13:15] wearing it with another And
[1:13:16] it's just one of these things
[1:13:17] where there's so much we don't
[1:13:18] know about what happens in our
[1:13:21] gcc that I have to raise a
[1:13:21] concern. It's a member and I
[1:13:25] know I just want to
[1:13:25] >> a flag for you like, you
[1:13:27] know, we're we're very aware
[1:13:30] that recognition legislatively
[1:13:31] regulated in the state of
[1:13:34] Colorado. And so that's, you
[1:13:34] know, you have to be something
[1:13:36] almost all of our vendors that
[1:13:37] dead even have anything
[1:13:39] related to facial recognition
[1:13:40] understand that we would have
[1:13:43] to explicitly opt in and
[1:13:43] typically we would have to
[1:13:47] provide evidence that, you
[1:13:48] know, we collaborated with
[1:13:50] city council as required by
[1:13:51] law in order to bring that
[1:13:55] technology and to use That's a
[1:13:56] lot. And our compliance with
[1:13:58] is another side topic. That's
[1:13:59] a reasonable course of this
[1:14:00] task force. And I just haven't
[1:14:01] had time to sort of fully ask
[1:14:02] questions about. And so
[1:14:06] >> I would like to do that as
[1:14:07] well because just it's only as
[1:14:09] good as our kind of enforce
[1:14:10] mechanisms. You know, that
[1:14:11] down flock was developed
[1:14:12] initial actions and
[1:14:13] technology. So again, we have
[1:14:15] an example where all these
[1:14:16] things on the on paper just
[1:14:17] into the tracks. All I have a
[1:14:18] question about that, but thank
[1:14:19] you for that. Has the
[1:14:22] administration probably hurt
[1:14:25] him. Doesn't sort of diligence
[1:14:25] on axons business immigration
[1:14:30] enforcement?
[1:14:31] >> Yes, mean, I know that they
[1:14:32] have contracts with dhs with
[1:14:34] ice to provide teachers and
[1:14:36] body-worn camera. I believe
[1:14:37] this was probably a top
[1:14:38] discussion when the body-worn
[1:14:38] camera Taser contract came
[1:14:40] through this body a couple of
[1:14:44] months ago. So it's certainly
[1:14:46] a factor. This obviously a
[1:14:47] separate program from those.
[1:14:51] To my knowledge, the federal
[1:14:52] there, there is not an example
[1:14:53] the federal getting access to
[1:14:57] that scenario. Lpr system.
[1:14:57] >> And I guess I'm curious
[1:15:00] whether after Mets executive
[1:15:01] order recently, whether
[1:15:04] there's any thought from the
[1:15:05] administration about kind of
[1:15:05] from like unethical
[1:15:09] contracting point of view
[1:15:10] considering those sorts of
[1:15:11] times before we agree get a
[1:15:12] lot of money to a company
[1:15:12] because that's something the
[1:15:14] mayor isn't interested. Happy
[1:15:16] have a conversation. Will this
[1:15:17] the time? Because we're about
[1:15:20] to vote on this and we would
[1:15:21] be, you know, paying money to
[1:15:23] this coming. We have a We
[1:15:24] hundreds company already, but
[1:15:25] this would be a new one that
[1:15:27] we don't have already. So I
[1:15:27] just wondered about that from
[1:15:32] the Executive branch Last
[1:15:33] question here. I just want to
[1:15:36] say correcting one thing to
[1:15:37] heart. We are adding new ones.
[1:15:37] I what can enter her and told
[1:15:40] the task force is that average
[1:15:45] range of time for what tpd
[1:15:46] defines as useful evidence
[1:15:50] from a flock cameras was up to
[1:15:52] 14 days, not 20. So I just not
[1:15:53] to her split, but I again
[1:15:57] wonder why 21 days and I also
[1:15:58] carry us about ledgers to
[1:16:00] actions have those 3, 4, a
[1:16:00] time frames that you
[1:16:05] referenced. Do know that tough
[1:16:07] I don't happy have a
[1:16:09] spreadsheet that I share with
[1:16:10] all council members of a range
[1:16:13] 25 or 30 cities and their
[1:16:14] retention policies.
[1:16:16] >> then since I know that you
[1:16:17] as long, just the idea that
[1:16:18] we're not going cameras near
[1:16:19] reproductive health
[1:16:20] facilities. That's obviously
[1:16:25] important. But that also. To
[1:16:27] me is sort banking the
[1:16:28] question. We know that don't
[1:16:29] Cameras have been used in
[1:16:30] other jurisdictions, for
[1:16:32] example, to monitor protest
[1:16:33] activity in the live streaming
[1:16:34] capability makes that far more
[1:16:38] concerning to me. That's
[1:16:38] another exercise of
[1:16:39] constitutional rights and
[1:16:40] concert tours that are still
[1:16:40] protected on like reproductive
[1:16:41] rights, which no longer are.
[1:16:43] But federal government. And so
[1:16:48] it just sort of To me. I feel
[1:16:51] like carving out particularly
[1:16:52] well organized kind of
[1:16:53] constituency in the voting
[1:16:54] rights groups who I appreciate
[1:16:56] and agree with. But then we're
[1:16:57] leaving unprotected. A lot of
[1:16:59] other people who might be
[1:17:00] engaging in other kinds of
[1:17:01] protected activity such as
[1:17:02] first met. Right? So I just
[1:17:02] want put that out there for
[1:17:06] conversation. A consideration.
[1:17:08] And I I want to add took a
[1:17:09] very long time to get this
[1:17:10] level of responsiveness. I'm
[1:17:13] glad that we're getting it,
[1:17:13] but I'm not feeling like like
[1:17:16] any of this would have
[1:17:19] happened. We have not had huge
[1:17:20] amount of accountability from
[1:17:20] the public about what went
[1:17:21] incredibly wrong with flock
[1:17:23] and should never have gone
[1:17:25] wrong. Should have been put a
[1:17:27] stop to a year sooner than it
[1:17:29] was and so on. So I just have
[1:17:30] to say that and that's not
[1:17:32] uncommon for dpd. Those are
[1:17:34] political decisions, but I can
[1:17:35] sort of I'm not going to give
[1:17:36] a lot of credit for for this
[1:17:37] process because this is a
[1:17:38] process that's been demanded
[1:17:41] from the public every step of
[1:17:43] the way. And it's been a lot
[1:17:43] of pulling together. Thank
[1:17:47] you. MISTER Chair. Thank
[1:17:47] Councilmember Gonzalez get
[1:17:50] discount cash money accounts
[1:17:51] for Flint.
[1:17:52] >> Yes, my question is for is
[1:17:53] it Joe with Axon? Yes. Is he
[1:17:56] any still available? Is the
[1:17:58] main office. Okay. Thank you.
[1:18:01] Thank you. So I have question
[1:18:02] about the trigger which
[1:18:03] triggers the cameras to
[1:18:05] activity and actually captured
[1:18:07] images. When I met with the
[1:18:09] fox it was explained to me
[1:18:10] that there was cameras were
[1:18:11] triggered by any sort of
[1:18:14] movement, including someone
[1:18:15] walking through a crosswalk.
[1:18:16] So was it just a on a mobile
[1:18:20] movement? It was unjust,
[1:18:21] capturing license plate data.
[1:18:24] It was also also capturing
[1:18:25] people because of that trigger
[1:18:28] and motion detection. Can you
[1:18:29] tell me how these cameras are
[1:18:34] triggered to capture?
[1:18:35] >> The way that our camera
[1:18:35] works is we have both active
[1:18:39] and passive infrared. The idea
[1:18:42] is basically a vehicle creates
[1:18:44] a large amount of heat. And so
[1:18:45] we have a heat signatures that
[1:18:49] basically send turns on the
[1:18:50] image sensor. That takes a
[1:18:51] photo of the vehicle and then
[1:18:53] we do analysis to pull out the
[1:18:56] license. We're also working on
[1:18:58] a motion based but that is
[1:19:00] vehicle specifically are not
[1:19:00] using these cameras to track
[1:19:05] motion of individuals.
[1:19:06] >> Thank you for for answering
[1:19:07] that. I think that just puts a
[1:19:11] finer point Lake making sure
[1:19:13] that whatever, however, that
[1:19:14] technology is being developed,
[1:19:15] that there is clear indication
[1:19:18] around that. Again, like not
[1:19:19] going into the like facial
[1:19:23] recognition piece rate of
[1:19:25] identify simple in the use of
[1:19:27] these cameras there was one
[1:19:31] other question I had forward.
[1:19:35] This is also for you, Joe.
[1:19:39] Wasn't around. How information
[1:19:42] is shared with other
[1:19:43] jurisdictions. And I know that
[1:19:44] dpd is saying that if there's
[1:19:45] not going to be to my
[1:19:47] understanding and open door
[1:19:49] kind of policy or even
[1:19:51] agreements with other
[1:19:51] jurisdictions that everything
[1:19:53] would stay in-house as opposed
[1:19:55] to how things were being
[1:19:57] shared before. But I just want
[1:19:58] to, I guess, put a finer point
[1:20:01] and and confirm if this is
[1:20:05] actually true, is that We'll
[1:20:09] see I have my here and forgot
[1:20:14] it.
[1:20:15] >> Is this so if there are
[1:20:18] protect our Times when data
[1:20:20] would be shared with other
[1:20:25] jurisdictions. The Axon
[1:20:27] different jurisdictions
[1:20:27] because this is something we
[1:20:29] talked about kind of artists
[1:20:31] that we know that if a crime
[1:20:34] occurs you know, the border of
[1:20:36] Denver and Lakewood and that
[1:20:38] person that goes into
[1:20:39] Lakewood, that there is some
[1:20:40] kind of collaboration that
[1:20:42] would be happening. And so
[1:20:44] just curious, like, where is
[1:20:45] everyone's part in that
[1:20:48] sharing of that information
[1:20:49] across jurisdictions?
[1:20:50] >> So on the opposite side
[1:20:52] all, what we're doing is
[1:20:53] creating a software that
[1:20:56] facilitates that sharing and
[1:20:56] then the facilitation
[1:20:57] overtime. We're developing
[1:20:58] more and more granular levels
[1:21:01] of that sharing peace.
[1:21:01] Councilmember parity asked the
[1:21:03] question earlier related to
[1:21:06] can you do it based off of
[1:21:06] just case? And the answer is,
[1:21:07] yes, we are developing. So
[1:21:08] that will be available by the
[1:21:10] end of this year where you
[1:21:11] could actually have a sharing
[1:21:13] protocol set up with Lakewood
[1:21:14] or any any agency that you set
[1:21:17] up the sharing principal with
[1:21:19] and it can a space to come.
[1:21:21] The reason based number of
[1:21:21] different characteristics, you
[1:21:22] also can have it set up where
[1:21:26] it's the full global access of
[1:21:27] of those lpr reads, but it's
[1:21:31] completely on your and
[1:21:33] discretion in terms how you
[1:21:35] create that sharing principle
[1:21:36] between agencies. There also
[1:21:38] is no syndication of
[1:21:41] information, meaning we are
[1:21:42] not rewriting that your pale
[1:21:44] pr reads into another
[1:21:46] database, but other agencies
[1:21:47] database, they are getting
[1:21:48] access to look at the data. So
[1:21:52] if you have your 14 day
[1:21:54] retention policy or 21 day
[1:21:56] retention policy. Those reader
[1:21:57] delete it and no other agency
[1:21:58] can be those because they're
[1:21:59] delete it. And they're only
[1:22:02] looking at your information.
[1:22:07] >> That's on the Thank you.
[1:22:07] Cards guns off terrorist
[1:22:10] Cashman think you MR. Chair
[1:22:17] bills from us to you know.
[1:22:21] Talks still
[1:22:22] >> Currently you're doing this
[1:22:24] more than license plate
[1:22:25] reader.
[1:22:29] >> Because you said can also
[1:22:32] look for body damage and Saint
[1:22:34] truck on a vehicle. Trying to
[1:22:37] find out exactly what. When
[1:22:38] you're taking pictures and
[1:22:41] just the back of the car. Can
[1:22:41] you capture the dent on the
[1:22:43] hood of a car in the roof?
[1:22:47] What is being done?
[1:22:48] >> Absolutely. So all do it
[1:22:49] all is based on the
[1:22:51] orientation of the camera to
[1:22:53] the road. And so we're
[1:22:53] capturing an image of the
[1:22:55] vehicle as it passes the
[1:22:57] camera. And so any
[1:22:57] characteristic of that
[1:23:00] vehicle, we would be able to
[1:23:00] capture. And then over time
[1:23:03] you be able to search off with
[1:23:05] policy Right now. It is an
[1:23:08] image of that. The back of
[1:23:09] that vehicle.
[1:23:10] >> It just shows that one
[1:23:11] image as the car passes you
[1:23:14] shooting multiple images.
[1:23:16] >> It is. It a shooting,
[1:23:17] multiple images and then
[1:23:18] taking the one has the best
[1:23:23] overall view.
[1:23:24] >> Thank marcher. And just
[1:23:29] customer fun. Temperatures I
[1:23:33] just be commander. Of all
[1:23:33] hundreds of thousands of
[1:23:36] photos might be in the
[1:23:38] database are rolling. 21 day
[1:23:43] basis. I just want for you so
[1:23:47] you can affirm that. Images
[1:23:51] are looked at. Are based on. A
[1:23:55] lurch. For information
[1:23:56] developed after a criminal
[1:24:01] complaint. But individual
[1:24:02] beagles are search only south.
[1:24:06] If I'm in there 5 times read
[1:24:08] camera hard times in 21 days.
[1:24:10] No one's working on my car.
[1:24:15] Former car stolen. So we still
[1:24:15] my plate robbed a 7.11 or
[1:24:17] something like that. And then
[1:24:20] on the other hand. If an image
[1:24:26] is useful crime. In
[1:24:27] investigation after the 21
[1:24:33] days. How is that preserved in
[1:24:33] evidence starcom and not
[1:24:34] pursue because we're gonna
[1:24:37] need a going forward for case
[1:24:39] firing. So how do that set up
[1:24:40] more medically as an automatic
[1:24:41] Lee? Same those? The
[1:24:45] detective. Drag and drop it
[1:24:45] into the case file so that
[1:24:48] available 21 days. Absolutely.
[1:24:49] So to address your first
[1:24:52] question. The majority of data
[1:24:54] will be automatically courage.
[1:24:55] There has to be there has to
[1:24:56] be nexus to a crime that was
[1:24:58] committed that we're
[1:24:59] investigating.
[1:24:59] >> In order for us to even go
[1:25:02] look at that image and that
[1:25:05] would be, you a fraction of
[1:25:06] the total amount of data
[1:25:09] that's captured in that
[1:25:10] automatically perched. There
[1:25:10] has to an official law
[1:25:13] enforcement reason to do that.
[1:25:17] And then as far as retaining
[1:25:18] images, if there is an image
[1:25:20] that is evidence in a crime,
[1:25:22] then I know that the platform
[1:25:23] has a specific way to retain
[1:25:24] that, according you know, and
[1:25:26] then tag it with the case.
[1:25:28] Number. I can't I can't think
[1:25:29] of off time. I had exactly
[1:25:31] what the mechanism is. A new
[1:25:32] platform. I'm sure some
[1:25:33] members of my team know
[1:25:34] exactly how to do that
[1:25:37] already. But there is a way to
[1:25:38] preserve evidence dot com as
[1:25:42] evidence for couple.
[1:25:43] >> In front starting just in
[1:25:49] terms of that worked out. Just
[1:25:50] be it called the lpr read. You
[1:25:51] can actually just click a
[1:25:53] button that says send evidence
[1:25:54] case.
[1:25:58] >> Thank you. That soldier.
[1:25:59] >> Thank you. Councilmember We
[1:26:00] have 5 more minutes to see if
[1:26:04] there's any final questions. I
[1:26:06] comes PRESIDENT Pro did not
[1:26:07] have an additional question.
[1:26:08] Councilmember Torres I to
[1:26:09] myself into queue for timing.
[1:26:12] But if it got.
[1:26:13] >> a couple of the camera
[1:26:15] placements for Flock had to
[1:26:20] put up with tier 3. Permits
[1:26:21] once we're no longer
[1:26:24] contracting with them. Does
[1:26:26] permit expired for them or
[1:26:28] what happens with that? Know
[1:26:29] you mentioned a new cameras
[1:26:33] would be utilizing the same
[1:26:35] encroachment kind of platforms
[1:26:36] coming. Just tell me a little
[1:26:41] bit had swapped takes place.
[1:26:41] Committed. Please jump in as
[1:26:42] well. The permits for those
[1:26:46] rate of weight.
[1:26:48] >> We're 4, 1, plate readers.
[1:26:49] Generically, I think to the
[1:26:52] earlier point, have term is
[1:26:53] better than specific. Those
[1:26:54] locations where there
[1:26:57] currently are flock cameras,
[1:26:58] her permitted and they would
[1:26:59] remain to be permitted for the
[1:27:03] permanent to flock No. It has
[1:27:04] in close communication with
[1:27:05] Donny and our understanding
[1:27:06] right now is no, they were not
[1:27:10] commit specifically to flock.
[1:27:10] >> And the swapping of
[1:27:11] hardware on those Poles should
[1:27:14] no problem. Okay. So what's
[1:27:14] the timing for this to come
[1:27:20] down? As soon as contract
[1:27:21] breaches term, our data spurs,
[1:27:24] those moved to become status.
[1:27:24] My team is working to schedule
[1:27:28] the with flock, to schedule
[1:27:29] the removal of those. I don't
[1:27:30] know what rate yet. They'll be
[1:27:32] able to remove them. But
[1:27:33] obviously we're going to move
[1:27:36] as as quickly as possible
[1:27:37] because the existing hardware
[1:27:37] has to come down. New thank
[1:27:43] you. Thanks. Thank you.
[1:27:43] Councilmember Torres song see
[1:27:44] no further questions on based
[1:27:49] on administration is request.
[1:27:51] >> I will put forward a motion
[1:27:54] to postpone this item to take
[1:27:57] certain 3/18/2026, I need a
[1:27:57] second second do we need vote
[1:27:59] or up and down anyone that
[1:28:02] it's on the committee that
[1:28:06] comes up. Perfect. Thank you
[1:28:10] so much for the presentation.
[1:28:11] We have second final many on
[1:28:16] week. We have one item on
[1:28:17] consent on that has not pulled
[1:28:17] off. So the meeting's
[1:28:32] adjourned. Thanks, everyone.