City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. It is Monday, March 23rd at 6 PM and I called this regularly scheduled Dumby City Council meeting to order. Uh, Councilwoman Lenbacher, can you lead us in the invocation and the pledge, please?

Yes, please rise if you are able. At this meeting, help us to make decisions which keep us faithful to our mission and reflect our values. Give us strength to hold to our purpose, wisdom to guide us, and a keen perception to lead us. And above all, keep us charitable as we deliberate. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to All right, it is time for our public comment section. Um, if uh when you come up, you'll have three minutes to speak. When I call your name, uh, approach Looks like that's in a different place, but maybe it's not. Appro approach the microphone. It should be on. Can someone check to see that the microphone is on, please? Okay. Is the green light on? Okay, great. All right. Um, Isaac Thman. Well, you should just introduce yourself, please, and you'll have three minutes, sir.

Okay. Hi, I'm Isaac. I'm a student at Kennesaw State University. Uh I'm here to comment on the Flock 911 contract. Um we my school Kennesaw has a contract with Flock. Um before we installed um their microphones, they promised explicitly to students and faculty that they wouldn't be used for voice detection or anything like that. They promised that anything outside of a gunshot would be immediately deleted. um they sent out a software update I believe in o in November or October to now listen for voices kind of um or to have the capability to uh detect human voices and pick up on that now after promising they couldn't. Um I was looking through the um block slides and I just wanted to comment on a few I don't want to say lies but at least errors that I spotted on most of the slides. Um, on the first one of the FAQ, it says, "Is the system tracking me or building a database of everywhere I go?" Um, they say that they have a 180day retention policy, which is interesting. I'll come back to that in a second. But um it says uh we do not use the system to monitor residents day-to-day routines which um um is kind of misleading because Flock is one of the systems that they they log every passing vehicle regardless of if you're on a hot list or suspected of any crime, which um to say that residents aren't being monitored is kind of misleading. whenever they're still keeping track of everywhere you go. Um, on the second slide, it says that the system's not they explicitly will only say that it's not designed for facial recognition. Um, saying implying it's like FL captures an image of the vehicle area and reads the license plate where it can. Um, systems not used for facial recognition. in their they have patents that are kind of that are very detailed

and um usage guides that kind of show how you can sort by or at least in their patent it shows that you can sort by race, sex, height, weight, clothing, etc. whatever that means, not faces. Um on the third slide they say that um who can access the data and how do we prevent misuse? They state that every search is logged which is not true. um their official documentation shows that um the platform doesn't process, store or log any prohibited queries. So if you make say I want to stalk somebody and I am an operator of this system, I have access legitimately. Say I want to stalk somebody which would be a personal use. If I type personal reasons, the system doesn't log that I attempted to do that. It simply asks me to try again with a different query I guess. So I'll just write investigate. Um, and then on the fourth page, it says, uh, how long do you keep the data? Um, it says detections are retained for 30 days, which, um, I'm not sure if that's true or not, but it contradicts the first slide, which says that they're retained for 180. So, uh, yeah, cool.

Thank you. I I forgot to mention that we I forgot to mention that we do 30 minutes of public comment. Just want to let that know everybody gets three minutes until we hit 30 minutes. Taylor Arnold, uh, approach the microphone and you'll have three minutes. Introduce yourself, please.

Hello, my name is Taylor and I'm a resident of Powder Springs. While I'm not from DudWoody, I I am here tonight because this issue does not stop at your city limits. This vote matters to me because my city and county connect with your flock cameras. We are not a separate system. We are one interconnected database tracking the movements of residents across municipal lines without most of them even knowing it. We have quietly allowed convenience to be the justification for eroding civil liberties. Every expansion of surveillance technology is sold to us as a public safety tool. But let's remember flock safety is a private investorbacked company. Data is how it generates value. When we fund this infrastructure with taxpayer dollars and hand over the data, which is the daily movement of residents, we should ask honestly who benefits and at what cost? I hear two arguments constantly in these conversations. The first is if you don't want to be tracked, don't carry a phone. But that but that framing dismisses decades of legal battles by ordinary people to protect the right to privacy. Those rights were not won easily and they should not be surrendered so casually. The second is you're in public so you can be recorded. There is a difference between being seen and being searchable when a taxpayer funded system uh allows law enforcement to search using Flock's feature free form green cardigan black dress gray Honda and pull up my location and history. routines, my patterns over weeks. That begins to look like the suspicionless search that the Fourth Amendment was written to prevent. Now, I want to talk about who is behind this technology. Peter Teal is one of the prominent venture capital figures connected to this space. He has publicly stated that he does not believe freedom and democracy are compatible. That is not a stated position from someone whose financial networks that is a stated position from someone whose financial networks fund this infrastructure from flock safety. The federal government is actively pushing to expand AI and surveillance capabilities with fewer restrictions and not more. In that environment, why would we expand and renew contracts with surveillance companies that have unresolved red and amber security findings, contradicted breach histories, audit logs rated as

high-risisk, and data deletion issues still listed as open. And even in my own county, I found an organization with access to our flock cameras labeled as do not use, still able to search the database. I don't know who flagged that or why, but that is exactly the problem. If someone inside the system identified that risk and they still have access, what does that tell us about who is actually monitoring this network? I hope this council understands that people in surrounding cities and counties are watching tonight, hoping that you will lead. You have an opportunity to say we will not invest in an evolving surveillance tool operated by a company whose security posture is unresolved and whose financial backers have shown that democratic freedom is not their priority. There are proven ways to reduce crime that do not require us to build a regional tracking infrastructure on a foundation of unverified compliance and convenient promises. Thank you for your time and more importantly, thank you to the residents of Dunwy who made sure that this conversation happened at all.

Jason, I can't see people. And next up is Jack Lane if you want to be ready.

All right. Hey guys. Uh once again, the public deserves to know in writing what surveillance technologies the police department uses and the city refuses to answer of Mr. Linton who's looking away in writing. Since February 6th, I've sent six emails to Mr. Linton. I've received one reply which was a deferral to Chief Carlson. This is a failure of transparency. Full stop. On top of this, the city security assessment reaches three conclusions I'd like to address directly. First, users are law enforcement. This is patently false. Flock safety employees have ownership level access to Dunwy's data system that includes hot lists, user management, live drone footage, and camera management. Last year, Flock employees conducted 401 searches directly through Dunwy's network. On top of that, over 11.77 million searches were run on Dunwoody's network last year. Is the city saying that is independently verified that every single person who conducted one of these 11.7 million searches is not a law enforcement officer? Because that's what this conclusion requires you to believe. Point two, the need for the application is proven to be high. Flock's own employees produced the 10% of crime reduced claim they put on a Times Square billboard. And one of the two academic researchers whose name appeared on it later said, and I quote, "He personally would have done things much differently because the underlying data was too varied and incomplete for any meaningful statistical analysis, just like the data you see in front of you tonight. More importantly, need has no bearing on security. is the city's position that because the department thinks they need this technology, we are willing to compromise on cyber security. That is an unacceptable standard. Point three, regular auditing is being conducted. Also false. I am the one who keeps finding these problems. These problems weren't caught by the city. They were caught by me, a private citizen, through open records requests. I discovered the department was incorrectly sharing a

private network from the MJCC with four external agencies. I discovered that done what he was sharing data with organizations literally labeled delete and do not use that the city never flagged. I'd asked the council to sit with that for a moment because the fact that these labels at all mean that Flock knew they existed yet they were still in Flock's system, still receiving our data with no one at the city being aware of it. They were still being shared for over a month after I raised it directly to the chief. The city has never completed a network sharing audit. And in all of 2025, the city conducted one audit covering 46% of the searches conducted with no written findings produced until I started asking about it. Zero audits were conducted on the 11.7 million searches done by external agencies on our data. Obviously, there's no oversight into these agencies either. The council should not renew this contract without real answers in writing, Mr. Linton and a public town hall describing these technologies and getting feedback from our citizens. Thank you.

Remember the claps count is time. Go ahead, Mr. Lane. Go ahead.

Thank you, city council and mayor. I appreciate your time. I'm here to express my support for Flock Flock safety cameras in our community. I believe they're practical and effective tool to help keep our neighborhood safe. These cameras assist law enforcement by providing timely information to help solve crimes. I personally have been involved in two instances where I appreciated these cameras. I believe they're practical and effective tool to help keep our neighborhood safe. I live in Brook Farm. I've lived in Dunwy for 41 years, and I appreciate everything that all of you do. These cameras assist law enforcement by providing timely information to help solve crimes, recover stolen vehicles, and respond more quickly when incidents do occur, which they will. Just as important, they can serve as a deterrent, helping prevent crime before it happens. I also appreciate that they're designed for a specific purpose with safeguards in place to focus on public safety while respecting while respecting privacy. my opinion. I understand there's different perspectives and that's important, but from where I stand, this is a smart, common sense step to help protect our community and support those who were responsible for keeping safe. Thank you for your service and your consideration.

Thank you.

Ben Jordan, you'll have approached the microphone, sir. And you'll have three minutes. Right. Uh, my name is Ben Jordan. I'm not going to be talking that much about privacy today. I'm going to use my three minutes for something that uh is probably unique to my cause here. I live about 15 miles away in Mapleton. I run a science and journalism nonprofit organization that also includes a large educational YouTube channel. About a year ago, I started formally researching the security posture of the police surveillance industry. Myself, John Gaines, and Joshua Michael found close to 60 security vulnerabilities or that were within or closely related to uh Flax Safety's ecosystem. Just to give the people here a couple examples, uh we were able to connect to and completely take control of the ALPR cameras. Uh we could view or modify the footage. We could install malware on them. We could view the hard-coded credentials that led to other places. And there is even one that allowed us to track the real-time GPS location of police vehicles. I published a selfie video literally pulled from one of the newly deployed flock cameras right down the road at Peach Tree Creek Greenway and showcased how easily I was able to access zoomed-in footage of every single person who walked on that trail over the last 30 days without using a password. Some of these findings were reported to Flock directly and some of them are now published and flagged by MITER which is part of Homeland Security to manage cyber security threats. Some of these are still rated today as high or critical vulnerabilities. Members of US Congress have cited my research in a published letter to the FTC calling for a formal investigation into Flock's negligence as a risk to national security. So, how did Flock respond to all this? because it it made news all over the

country. Fake news. The CEO himself claimed that Flock had never been hacked and he spent his time sending unsolicited emails to law enforcement agencies around the country telling them that their agency was under coordinated attack by activist groups who want to defund the police, weaken public safety, and normalize lawlessness. This was Flock's response to a formal report about security vulnerabilities. I watched Flock representatives stand up at city hall meetings just like this one with people dead in the eyes and despite evidence verified by MITER claim that Flock has never been hacked. So now we're all here and we could go to the nearest Falcon camera right now and I will lend you a laptop and walk you through the quick process of seeing if just one of these vulnerabilities have been fixed. In fact, I've already offered to pay for a security audit on Dunwy's surveillance infrastructure, and nobody took me up on it. I want someone to help me understand, given the evidence that we produced, how anyone would think that signing more contracts with any third-party surveillance vendor would be a good idea without setting up an independent security and ethics audit first. I can't open a barber shop or a Chick-fil-A without a safety inspection.

Thank you. Thank you. Ben Jordan. Um, oh, sorry, just did you. Sean Sean Collins and then Joe Hirs, you're next.

Hey, I'm Sean Collins. I was here a month ago to talk against Flock. I'm here to talk against flock again, but first I want to go back to February. When y'all approved $130,000 for police barricades, uh, you know, the police chief got up here. He described why y'all needed these barricades, why they're so good. Y'all asked some good questions like, "How many barricades does that buy?" He couldn't answer. Y'all said, "Well, why can't the private events pay for them?" I don't know. That's a good idea. Y'all said, "Oh, we could talk about that later. And then y'all unanimously approved it after the city manager decided to fearmonger about anti-terrorism units. Didn't provide any evidence. Didn't provide any anecdotes. Just said people in other countries rent U-Haul vans and run people over in crowds. And y'all said, "Uh, we can't wait for those answers. Let's just go ahead and waste $130,000 of Dunwy money. Anyway, I also have a personal story with Flock. I'm the HOA president of the terraces of Dunwy behind the Burger King. We had mail theft for over 3 months. The mail thief was coming every single day at some point and Dunwy PD did absolutely nothing. They showed up when we called. They were always 30 minutes late. The thing that ultimately caught the thief was a flock camera because we, the community, had his photo, followed him to his car, and provided that to Dunwy PD. You know what else would have [ __ ] solved that? A normal license plate reader, not an AI enabled one, or a Dunwhaty PD officer sitting in an unmarked car. This guy came every day for a month and nothing happened until

we did it. So, I don't think Flock solved that crime. I think we did. I want to mention, too, you know, people talk about, oh, no one really cares about Flock. I think there's a lot of people here that do, but there's still a bunch of other people in Dunwy that don't care about Flock. Mostly because they don't know about Flock. And that's by design. Flux started with homeowner organizations. Then they crept up into towns and cities so that they could avoid Senate oversight and a bunch of other legalities. And now we're all connected magically between Cobb Dab Atlanta, do not use and whatever else. So I don't know, man. Maybe every time we get up here and tell y'all that Flock is not a good company and y'all send us back to square one by whatever those slides are going to say later. Oh, we don't track. Oh, you know, retention is 120. Oh, no, actually retention's 30. Oh, we don't change the you.

Thank you. Thank you,

Mr. Hers. She'll have three minutes.

When it comes to the city voting on the newer Flock cameras, it doesn't matter what the city says because you have a serious credibility problem. Nothing you say or tell us about Flock should be taken as honest. I know that Flock can be useful, but it can also be a serious violation of our privacy. Unfortunately, we know whatever safeguards or rules the city claims would be in place to protect privacy are worthless. I heard just the other day that a Dunwy police officer was disciplined for misusing flock data in spite of the rules already in place that should have prevented that from happening. I hope you ask about those details this evening. Whose records did they violate? Dunwy has no credibility. Our own city manager, Eric Clinton, he deliberately and illegally disposed of his cell phone so the public and courts cannot see the records on his phone. So he's definitely not someone who's credible. Done what? has no credibility as well because as you know when it comes to records our records clerk Eric Sheileley he said under oath that he does not bother to refer to state laws about records and he routinely violates those laws. He is not credible. He said that under oath and as you know uh our city clerk Sharon Lowry who oversees the records in our city she's dishonest. She participated in a conversation with our IT director, Ginger Leage, where they chose to lie about public records rather than implicate our former police chief. They both have serious credibility problems. They are not trustworthy with our records. And as for our police department, earlier this year, the police chief was notified that they were that the city police department was illegally and publicly disclosing the names of juveniles on the internet after the teens received citations in the city. Those records should not have been disclosed. But our police department was doing so because they trusted the vendor to do the right thing when it would have only taken our police department 10 seconds to see what records were improperly being shared. They were too

lazy to do that. They trusted the the vendor. So when you hear from our police department saying they trust Flock, it's clear that our police are too lazy to verify what a vendor such as Flock says. The Dunoody Police Department failed our city earlier this year with our kids records. So why should we believe a word they tell us now about flock? They have a serious credibility problem themselves. And look at yourselves for credibility. Each of you on this council really don't care about protecting the public. Your main interest is in protecting yourselves from in and loyal employees. No matter what they do. Case in point, if I go 15 seconds past my time over here, y'all will run around like scared little cockroaches. But when someone else violates and breaks the law in this city, you do nothing and you just sit on your hands and turn the cheek. So go ahead, make your promises to us about how serious you take the rules of privacy. You embolden employees that are incompetent and dishonest people who don't care what the rules are. You and I both know the next time flock is misused in our city, you will turn a blind eye because none of you are trustworthy with our records. Ali,

I think you're I saw you earlier. Are you still here? Did he leave?

Okay, thank you. Viv Vivian Hudson, if you'll approach the microphone, ma'am, you'll have three minutes. Hello, I'm Vivian Hudson and I'm here to talk about the roadway that we're putting between uh on Chambbley Dumy between Mount Vernon and Roberts. I have some real concerns about what we're doing there. Part of it is the mining. That's only one part. Uh the other part is the way we're designing it. I think we always have to improve our roads. I don't mind improving our roads, but it worries me we're going to use first off um a cement, more cement. I think we should do a semi-permeable type of pathway for the bike pathway. If you look at Sandy Springs over by the MARTA station when it rains, the water is a foot and a half deep when it really pours. I think that we need to redesign that part. I really dislike getting rid of the third lane in the middle. I've done a video diary during the week to see how much uh traffic is actually being violated or people are doing the wrong things with the middle. It's just two lanes of people staying where they need to be until it's time to turn left. We used to have a island there on the uh parkway that went through by the post office and it had trees and everything in the middle and we were told it was too inefficient. Well, now we're wanting to put that onto Shambly Dumb Woody Road. Also, if we put the cement down the center of Shambling Dumy Road, people at the last stoplight there by the Publix start off just flying up the road towards the elementary school. And it's because they don't know there's a road to the right. So, they actually get faster as they come around that corner. And if we put the cement there, that's going to cause people to go even more quickly because you're going to be following the lefthand side cement going

up. So, I I think we need to really look at what we're doing here and make some new considerations. This came along quite far before I realized it was going to happen, but I did come about three months ago and talk to the person who was in charge of doing it. I didn't get a lot of feedback, but I think that we really need to look at this again before we decide that we're going to put in more asphalt. I notice I've already chopped down one of the trees there in front of the publics. Could it be something that they've decided to do? But I mean, you can already tell the difference in the light factor. So, I really would like to not cut down the trees there by the swimming pool at the uh Robert's Road intersection. I think we need to redesign or at least look at very carefully where Shambbley Dunwitty comes in with Robert's Drive and Shambbley Dunwitty. I think we need to get rid of the cement divider in the center. I don't mind the walkway. I don't mind the ba uh the bike path. I think those are good ideas. I just don't want to see us waste a lot of money when we could improve rather than completely revamp. So, I hope that we'll consider looking at this again before we pass to go ahead to the final uh build. Thank you.

Thank you, Jam Monica Thompson. Uh if you'll approach the microphone, ma'am, you'll have three minutes.

Good evening. It's great to be back and great to see you guys again. I'm not here about flock. I'm here about something totally different. So, um, a couple of weeks ago, probably three weeks ago, right when the weather broke, um, I got together with a group of friends and colleagues, and we went to Natai, which is a Thai restaurant over in the shops at Dunwitty. We had had long weeks. We were tired. We wanted to unpack things that happen at work, have some good food, good drinks. So, we go over to the shops at Dunwitty. And one of the things I noticed is that the big open green space was overrunning with children, literally. And the first thing I thought was, we have local parks. Why not go to the park? So, I didn't really have an issue with it until we're eating. You got kids whizzing around your table, throwing bowls, you know, I couldn't figure out where we were at this point. Um, I'm here because I feel like some of the parents, I guess, have developed this really strong sense of entitlement that because you have kids, it's okay for you to take over a whole green space. That's very entitled for me. Um, you have people that come out there for different reasons like me and my colleagues and friends. People are out there to dine, to have a good time. Um, and I bring it up because I don't really have an issue with kids. actually love kids, but I have an issue with parents that don't supervise. That's my issue. I have an issue with parents that don't teach their kids good manners. That's my issue. So, my previous community did something that I thought was brilliant. They implemented something called adult hours. We had a community pool. There were some issues there and so they implemented adult hours that were just for adults. And I think we probably need to do that with some of the entertainment spaces in Dun Woody. Um, I don't have an issue with families coming out, but you have single professionals here. You have people that don't have kids. Like, we live here, too. So, that night, we ended up cutting it short and just kind of leaving

because it was hard to enjoy with all the chaos. So, I would like the city to possibly think about for some of the entertainment spaces for having adult hours. It could be um adults only after 700 p.m. Um the same thing over where the Saucerita, Jenny's ice cream, Taco Mac, the same thing is happening over there with that green space. And I think we need adult hours so that adults can come out and enjoy themselves and not always have a bunch of chaos going on. Thank you.

Thank you. Is Richard Mloud here? Jay, could you get um Okay. Could you get Miss Thompson's contact information, please? Uh all right. Uh Sharon, how much time do we have left? Or Jessica? Okay. Joseph Fabro, approach the microphone and you'll have three minutes. And then Erin Miller, you will Well, it depends on how long. Erin Miller, you're the next speaker.

Uh good evening. Um, so the gentleman over there like is a good Samaritan and hacked it. Hacked Flock. I'm going to be speaking about Flock. And thankfully, he's here to warn y'all. A nefarious actor could use that to stalk your constituents. Or if you don't care about them, could use that to stalk y'all, which is creepy and wrong, and we just shouldn't have that sort of technology available. And it's a waste of money of taxpayer money that like I and other people who work here pay for. So, we have no re y'all have no reason to do it. Just get normal cameras. It's not a big deal. And just because he's like some the CEO is some Georgia Tech kid doesn't mean we have to give preferential treatment. We can just find a you can just get any regular camera. Like Kodak has existed for decades. It's not a big deal. Thank you,

Aaron Miller. Uh you'll have three minutes, sir. And then you

um yeah, I'm here to speak against Flock. Uh many people have made a lot of good points. I just want to bring up some uh inconsistencies or lies that were made at the last hearing about Flock. I looked through the transcript and did some of my own research. Um Mr. McCormack, the Flock rep, at the last hearing, he said, "A data is owned by the customers. We don't sell the data." However, in Flock's own terms and conditions, Flock is granted an irrevocable worldwide license to use customer data. They're also granted a perpetual royalty-free license to training data even after the termination of a contract. Uh, Flock also recently removed a clause from their terms and conditions that said, "We do not sell customer data." So, um, they also claimed or Mr. McCormack claimed that they have objective evidence that license plate readers reduce bias. However, independent data shows the opposite pattern. In Oak Park, Illinois, for example, 84% of flock stops involved black people, who are only 19% of the population. 40% of flock triggered stops were mistakes, and all of those mistaken stops but one, targeted a black person. Uh, Mr. McCormack also claimed that Flock strips all identifying information. However, what he's talking about is stripping metadata, which is just a completely different thing than actual deidentification. Um, they're not deidentified. Um, Dunwood's police chief also claimed that the cameras act as a deterrent. I heard that claim echoed today. This is not supported at all by academic peer-reviewed evidence. You can see studies from George Mason University. You can see recent examples from the city of Tulsa, Oklahoma before and after the installation of ST of Flock. Um, crime rates actually went up after Flock

was installed. Um, and Flock's own claims to this are self-reported, unverified, not peer-reviewed, and the chief himself offered no Dunwy specific data. So, we can see that there's a a conflict of interest here. We wouldn't trust the Coca-Cola Corporation to uh provide us with honest studies of the link between sugary sodas and diabetes. So, we can't trust flock representatives to give us information about how these systems violate privacy and the safety of everyone in this room. And it's not just a matter of misuse of these systems or little glitches, but rather inherent flaws in the system of mass surveillance, which allows for and encourages its abuse. So, I truly hope that you uh cancel the contract. Thank you.

We're done. That's 30 minutes. That concludes the public comment section before the meeting. There will be a public comment section at the end of the meeting. Um, uh, you're welcome to remain. I have I'll call the cards that weren't called. Um, and that is where we are now. We have a special presentation from Lifeline Animals Showcase. Can you come join us, please?

Hi everyone. My name is Jessica Davis. Um, I am the social media coordinator at Dicab County Animal Services, which is the animal shelter that services Dunwy and all of Dicab County. Um, I live in Dunwy. My husband is a Dunwy PD officer. Um, and I've been with Lifeline for about three months now as a staff member and volunteered with Lifeline um, for about two and a half years before um, becoming an employee. So, we have been graciously invited to come once a month and talk about what's going on with Lifeline as well as bring an adoptable dog for you guys to see. Um, uh, Chambbley has done this as well, which is really special. So, we're happy to be here and we're thankful for the invitation. Um, our animal shelter was built to comfortably house around between um, 250 and 350 dogs. Um, since it's been open, we've been much higher than that. Um, as of today, we have 483 dogs housed um, in the shelter and then about 500 additional dogs in foster care. So, we have around a thousand dogs um, in our care. Um, we need to get that number down to 475 dogs by tomorrow at 7 p.m. So, if you've been interested in fostering or adopting, um, this is a great time to do it. So, we normally see an influx of um, strays and owner surreners during this time of year, unfortunately. So, we are kind of expecting to to see that again and we're just preparing um for what we've seen in the past. Um we did have a really amazing adoption event last weekend where we had um all three lifeline locations. So, we had Dicap County, Fulton County, and then the um community animal center. We had dogs from each of those locations and in total 53 dogs got adopted, which was really awesome. Yeah, it was awesome. Um, and then we will be at the Brook Haven Cherry Blossom Festival, which is March 28th and 29th. Um, one specific thing I wanted to speak on tonight is

court case fostering. This is not something that I knew anything about before I started with Lifeline. Um, but let's say the dog has been um, neglected and abused and um, their owners are going to enter into a court case where hopefully they'll be charged for the way that they mistreated that animal. until the court case is closed. Um the dog has to be is considered live evidence and is held at our shelter for months to years. Um the reason for that is because sometimes the dog is returned to the owner depending on the circumstances of course. Um but until the course the court case is over the dogs are not able to be adopted out. Um we're limited on what medical care we can give them and they're not able to be on the adoption floor. So, we have anywhere from 30 to 60 court case dogs um in our building at a time. Again, those court cases range from 2 to 3 months all the way up to two years. Um so, we have dogs that are really declining that we're just not able to market. Um but they are able to go to foster. So, if you've been considering fostering but feel like you don't have the time to market a dog, court case dogs are great because they can't be marketed. So, it frees up a space in our shelter. um you're immensely helping out the dog and um you really don't have to do that much. So, I just wanted to mention that as an opportunity. Um this dog is Reanesca. She has been with us since February. Um her owners were evicted and we're no longer to take care of her, unfortunately. Um her bio says she's 50 lb. No, I think that she's probably closer to 70 lbs and could put on a couple pounds as well. She's a little underweight. Um, Reanesca is actually one of our assessor dogs. So, what that means is that when we have new dogs that come into the shelter, we assess them to see if they're good with other dogs. Ranesca is the dog that helps us do that. So, that means she is the bomb.com with other dogs. Um, she is great at reading energy. She's great at deescalating.

She's just an all-around really special girl. Um, she's estimated to be between four and 5 years old. She's heartworm negative and spade, which means she is ready to go home. Um, so if you're interested in meeting her, um, we're open seven days a week. Ranesca's available for, um, dog for the day. She could do, um, weekend warrior, which is our short-term foster program. And then, of course, she's available for adoption as well. So, we really appreciate you guys having us here. Um, we'd love to get Ranesca in a home. Um, we love her little bunny outfit tonight. She's just the most gentle girl. So, we appreciate you guys for having us and we look forward to being here next month. Okay. All right, there's a lot of people here. Probably some people watching. A lot of people taking video. Go home and share the pictures of the dog. Let's see if we can get this dog a new home. I'm very competitive and the mayor of Shambbley is a year ahead of me and has had a tremendous amount of success with this program. So, let's go Dunwy. All right, gotta find my place. All right, next is the flock safety security assessment with Jill Dunn and Ginger Le Page.

Good afternoon. Uh my name is Jill Dunn. I know many of you. Uh I am outside council for the city and I just wanted to give a brief update from the contract standpoint of where this stands. Uh we're in the process or I am in the process of negotiating a new master services agreement with flocks attorney. Um the point of that would be we would have a new master agreement that would govern uh it would replace all of the existing contracts. It would govern all of the existing orders, everything that is currently out there between the city and flock and it would govern all future orders as well. Uh this is still a document that's being prepared. We're actively working on it, but there are uh I know there are a number of concerns that have been raised. So we are addressing all of those. Um I can talk briefly about those or if the council has any questions. Um I can just tell you that we are adding specific language for example to define better defined security breach and data breach and explaining what um what the notice and response uh procedures are visavlock in in the city in the event that one that a data or security breach occurs. So we're tightening the protocol and making the protocol uh in those situations um enhanced from what it frankly from what it is and has been in the past. we are um addressing the issue uh with the online terms and conditions and providing that the online terms and conditions that are in effect at the time that this MSA is is entered into are the are frozen in time that they cannot be changed um absent written approval from the city and they will also be subordinate to the terms that are in the MSA meaning that if if there's a conflict between the contract terms and the online terms and

conditions, the contract terms that have been negotiated by the city will govern whatever the issue may be. Um, we're also adding revisions to the indemnity and the limitation of liability language to strengthen and enhance those along with clarifying the issue uh of ownership of the data and the ability of flock to license, sell, transfer, grant asset access to any of the city's data. So, all of those issues, again, they're still in process, but we hope to have uh a draft of that updated agreement shortly in the next, you know, 7 to 10 days, call it. Um, and we can go from there. But I just wanted to give an update of where that stands from the from the legal contract side.

Thank you. if I can. The the other thing some of the questions that have been come up include things like pilot programs or when we're uh given equipment to test out it would the MSA would cover pilot programs whether there's a contract or not any use of by the city of flock equipment would be subject to the MSA and not off off the chart. So what we're trying to do is cover the field so that any and all application use equipment whether now or in the future regardless would be covered by the MSA. And the most important thing I think Jill said is no matter what the floating terms are on their web page, the MSA will cover these areas of concern. We made a list and went through the list that uh council has raised through citizens uh inquiries and those are all going to be addressed in the in the MSA. Uh but I just wanted to make sure because somebody asked me about what about pilot programs? What about testing equipment like the drone? As y'all know, we had a drone for a minute before we finalized a transaction. They wouldn't cover instances of that and any other kind of relationship between Dunwood and Vlock.

Right. Are there any questions for Jill? Okay. So, thank you. And maybe and then maybe don't leave just in case something goes up. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. If you'll give me just a moment, I'm gonna pull this presentation up. Um, I do want to say that I did find the couple of inconsistencies in my um, presentation and I have kind of changed that one piece on here. So, I did add accessibility so that I wrote the colors for people that maybe can't see color. I had forgotten to kind of add that in there before I published. And then I also went in and changed the language. um some of the discrepancy with the language, just so you know, was because we're still going back and forth trying to confirm with state what the record retention schedule is right now for that. And so until that has been confirmed, I did not want to put it in black and white in the presentation. So my version that I have here, I'll share and it will show it just says record retention legal record retention requirements is what I've changed the days to. So I just wanted to address that kind of off the bat. Okay. So, some background. Uh, Flock Safety was founded in 2017 to address neighborhood crime utilizing license plate readers, um, LPRs as everyone's been talking about. Um, it's kind of the go-to product for law enforcement agencies across the nation right now due in part to its data sharing model. So, what we're kind of talking about is kind of the purpose of Flock and the value to the PD is the data sharing. Uh, Flock Safety is kind of the major company, but they have a bunch of different pieces, the license plate readers, the drones, Flock OS, Flock OS 911, and Nova. Uh, Dunwy PD is currently using many of Flock Safety's products, and it's looking to renew Flock OS 911 specifically. That's the product that we're talking about here. Due to some recent security concerns, council's asked that I come up and give this presentation. So, that's kind of what we're doing right now. But I want to kind of start really quick and put my dispatcher hat. I don't know who knows, but I used to be a 911 dispatcher. So

I'm going to put on my 911 dispatcher hat for just a moment and talk about Flock OS 911 because I think it's important to understand kind of the product we're talking about specifically first. So Flock OS 911 allows responding officers to hear 911 calls real time. So what that means is in the current world pre flock OS 911 which is live right now just so we know but in the pre-world the way that it works is there's a call taker there's a dispatcher and there's a caller so what happens is the caller calls 911 they're talking to the call taker the call taker enters the data into the computer the dispatcher now sees the computer data and reads it aloud to the officers whenever they get around to it sometimes it's a couple minutes because it can be really busy And so they might be doing other stuff. They will read it. They will come back and they will um tell the officers. The officer will ask another question. The dispatcher will then have to put it in. The call taker will see it when the call taker sees it. And now they're asking the question of the the caller. So the difference is with Flock OS 911, what's happening now is you're kind of taking out that middleman piece of it and the call taker is asking the questions. Now the officer is listening to the call real time. And so they're actually hearing he has a gun or um they're running that way and the the officer now hears it and you skip all those middle steps and instead the officer is hearing those updates real time which is really valuable in those situations. Um so I did do a minor security assessment of Flock OS 911 alone and that came back positive. It meets expectations, minimal risk. Um, basically it's just like any other similar product. Um, and it came back green in the matrix that we're about to talk about. So now I do understand that what the council actually asked me for though was a complete um security

assessment of flock a um comprehensive security assessment. So over the last um month we've reviewed all the available information. I completed interviews with the PD. I completed interviews with flock and um we developed the matrix that we're about to talk about. So the legend is green meets expectations minimal risk. Uh yellow meets with conditions low to moderate risk. Amber meets with conditions high risk and red does not meet expectation higher risk. Um in order to get a color grade both criteria have to be met. So it's broken down into six main categories. We have governance and policy alignment which includes sieges which is criminal justice information system. So that's the what the officers use to find if it's a wanted person or a stolen stolen vehicle things like that. So we checked out the sieges adjacent requirements, retention expectations, internal policy. We looked into data protection, encryption, handling sensitive data. We looked at user access and authentication which includes role-based access control, multiffactor authentication, single sign on. We looked at audit logging and oversight uh review of access searches, admin reporting. We looked at operational resilience, availability, support model, incident response, and we also checked the privacy and compliance administration, appropriate use controls, documented procedures, and transparency. So, we're going to first talk about the governance and policy alignment. You'll see this is one of the first changes on the slide. I just want to say I added yellow and green next to it for people that can't see the color. Um, CEUS alignment. So, Flock has a sie uh security certification. So, they have actually worked with the criminal

justice information system and obtained that certification, meaning their employees would be siege certified. uh retention legal hold governance. So uh Dunwy PD has established workarounds for the retention and legal hold governance but there was no automation in place for the legal hold piece of it. But Damody PD has worked to ensure that there are policy and standards in place which is why it is still green but also yellow. Uh also the formal review cadence for sharing relationships. So Dunwy has agreed to update their policy to ensure that they are going above and beyond the regular uh requirements. Data protection is yellow and green. Encryption at rest and in transit is clearly described. Tenency isolation controls are described. Uh the catch is that there was no supportive evidence provided for several of the categories and that is why they are yellow with the green. So they described that they're doing all the things but they did not provide the evidence and that means we were take your word for it.

Um hey Ginger um I'm I'm not an IT person. Can what's tenency isolation control please?

So that is talking about they're in a cloud environment and so that's just saying that they have put in the right places or the right pieces to make sure that only they're the ones that can access the data that they have. And then when you think of a tenant is like a database, right? So, uh can you kind of take it down a little bit lower? So, is it a single tenant uh that all of our data is sitting in or is it multi- we have a they have one cloud and they have everybody using it. Um so, I think that the term tenant needs it. Let let everybody know what a tenant means please too. So when it comes to the actual technical piece, I do have to be kind of careful about talking too in detail because of the cyber security rules that are kind of in place about open meetings. And so I don't want to get too detailed, but I will say that um the data sharing model well actually the sizzo's here to to speak to that specifically. I don't want to answer the technical too too in depth. Okay. So, user access and authentication is amber and green. So, Flock is advising that multiffactor authentication is enforced and role-based access control exists for admins. Um, and Dunwy PD utilizes multiffactor authentication. The catch is that agencies manage their own multiffactor authentication. So just because Dunwy is using multiffactor authentication, it does not mean that other agencies are for sure using multiffactor authentication. We did ask flock to look into adding multifactor authentication as a requirement across the board and they have agreed to look into that. Um okay so audit logging and oversight Amber Green. So

um this is dominated by the standing self-service sharing model which is intrinsically higher just it's a higher risk in general because of what it is. It's sharing data um and it's sharing data in a self-service so people have access to our data on their own. Dunwy has agreed to address multiple audit oversight items using additional training, auditing, and updating their policy to go above and beyond the regular requirements and more frequently. Um, and Flock has considered or has agreed to consider adding real-time alerting on potential misuse. So, if they do add that, that would mean AI could help try to identify misuse real time. Operational resilience is amber in yellow. Disaster recovery targets are stated. Um so this is talking about how long it takes them to recover, how long they're okay being down and all of it looked good. Um the one caveat is that they are relying on a single provider. So that is a common occurrence with the cloud. A lot of providers or a lot of um companies rely on a single provider in this type of case, but we have found where things can happen. I'm sure you guys have heard instances in the past where Delta or other things have gone down because they were relying on one thing. So, we have asked them to potentially look into having additional providers instead of being single provider dependent. Um, Flock did also advise that they had no breaches in the last three years, but there have been publicized camera breaches and so that was a red flag. Hey, excuse me. That we are trying to do business here. You have public comment.

Continue, Ginger. Thank you. Okay. You know what? Stop. Please let us do the work that you look most of you are not from here because could you introduced yourselves and you told us and so okay please let us do the work that you you came here to hear this discussion please let us do the work that we need to do okay please continue Ginger

okay So, Flock advises that there have been no breaches in the last three years, but there was publicized camera breaches that occurred as recently as December. Um, one of the things that we're looking at to assist with that is trying to ensure that the contract language that's being drafted right now includes a definition of a breach so that that is more clear in the future. Privacy and compliance administration is amber and green. Uh the master service agreement is currently being formalized as you heard from Jill and once it is formalized it will not be changeable without completing a new review. Um Dunwy is making updates to their policy for external auditing to ensure that it's happening more frequently. Um now the next part of it is when you're talking about a security assessment you also have to talk about the risk versus reward right you have to consider what is the use like what is the purpose of this product and is it worth the risk so we worked with Duny to answer some questions about the reward and the first thing you see here is a slide about average days to close so the slide starts in 2010 and this is Dunwy's data this came directly from our RMS system and what you see is a decline in the average days to close. So this is for the criminal the C the detectives and what they're doing is this is from the time that the incident the case starts and opens until it is closed. That's how long it takes. Yes.

What's an RMS system? What's RMS? Sorry.

Okay. I'm always the one to like ask the acronyms because I don't know acronyms. Yes. So that is the reporting the report management system. So that is where the um PD utilizes. So they'll get a call and then they when there's a case created it goes into the RMS system. Um okay so this data comes directly from our RMS and as you can see that there is a decline in the days to close as Flock has been rolled out. So you see in 2019 there were 21 LPR cameras added and Flock helped solve a commercial burglary. In 2020 40 LPR cameras were added. In 2022 Flock helped solved a double homicide. In 2023, there were two area gunshot detections added 20 condors to city parks. and Flock helped solve a mall shooting and a jewelry robbery crew. In 2021, Flock OS 911 was rolled out and 20 solar powered condors. And then in 2025, the first aerodyome drone added and it helps um locate two missing people. So also as part of this I asked the PD to submit the five most frequently asked questions and the responses for those five most frequently asked questions. Um the first one is is the system tracking me or building a database of everywhere I go? And the response is no. Flock is not GPS. It does not track vehicles in real time like a phone app. It records a detection when a vehicle passes a camera location. Those detections can be searched later within the retention period when there is a legitimate law enforcement purpose. We do not use the system to monitor residents day-to-day routines and all searches are logged and can be audited.

The second question, what exactly is being captured? License plates only or photos of drivers and passengers too? And the response to that was, "Flock captures an image of the vehicle area, typically the rear or side, and reads the license plate when it can. The image is mainly used to identify the vehicle and plate, and it may also note general vehicle descriptors like color, type, and make, model characteristics. The system is not designed for facial recognition, and we do not use that to identify drivers or passengers by their faces. Question number three, who can access the data and how do you prevent misuse? Access is limited to authorized trained personnel who needed to perform official duties. Each search is logged, including who searched, when, and what they searched, and those logs can be reviewed to confirm the system is being used appropriately. If someone were to use the system for personal reasons, it would be treated as a serious policy violation and could result in disciplinary disciplinary action up to and including termination and potentially a criminal investigation depending on the circumstances. Question number four, how long do you keep the data and can it be used for minor issues? Detections are retained for legally required retention period and then automatically deleted unless specific records are saved as evidence in an individual case consistent with law and policy. Our intent is to focus use on legitimate public safety needs. For example, stolen vehicles, vehicles connected to crimes, missing person's cases, or suspect vehicles. And finally, question five, is this legal? and what privacy protections are in place, especially in Georgia? And the response, yes, license plates are displayed in public and courts have generally treated plate and vehicle observations in public view as

information law enforcement may lawfully observe and document. Even so, we take privacy seriously. We follow written policies that define permitted use, limit who can access the system, set retention time frames, and require audit logs to deter and detect misuse. We also comply with applicable Georgia laws and public records requirements, including protecting information that is exempt from release. For example, details that could compromise an active investigation or sensitive victim related information. And that is the end of my presentation. Okay.

All right. Uh council questions, comments? Joe, go ahead. Um this just to Eric uh just let you know folks um was a city council, city mayor, former government. So the elected officials have the city manager that runs operations and everything goes to Eric. So I appreciate you, Eric. Um and I I directed this at at Eric and not to staff. And so um I appreciate this. We asked for IT presentation and you've done that. Green, amber, red. I I wanted to hear from the actual city employees and the representatives of the city and I appreciate that. and you have legal doing your due diligence. So, I really appreciate a fairly quick turnaround in that regard as well. You've got a lot of research to do. And when I step back at this, I think we're doing things at the national level, little Dunwy, small government, lowest taxes in all of Dunwy, all of all of DAB. And we're doing things that the rest of the country may not even be doing right now. So, this is something that the conversation being had. the due diligence is in taking place and the process is moving forward. And I really appreciate just being here and having this conversation and us being able to listen from through people that work for you and you work for us that indirectly, Eric, right? That you know, so we ask you and you delegate and and have these things come up forward through us. So I again when I mentioned this I put out on my blog we shouldn't have to understand all these low-level technology and we were asking the vendor um a month ago all these detail questions I'm like no I'd rather talk and let's let's step this back and forward. So um thank you for the process and thank you for having that conversation. Thank you Ginger and team. Um I do want to make sure that we're adding scope and that if there's additional resources that we need internally based on the outcomes of this due diligence um internally whether we

need to have additional you know people that are going to run the order to look at these policies to do these audits and so on. Do we need the headcount staffing budget etc and especially segregation duties looking at governance risk making sure you know we have independent things going on out there as well. Um, we do not form the policies of the Dunwy Police Department here at the council, but um, you know, that's something we need to look at, right? If we need to I hear more about the DPD and asking for them to do more and and those things. So, that'd be something I just want to make sure that we're addressing properly. Okay. Thank you for your time. Else, Katherine.

Hi, Ginger. It indicate that we do no auditing of the license plate reader data. There was auditing occurring based on GCIC requirements, but I did ask as part of this review for them to increase it above and beyond what GCIC requirements are. Yep. Yeah. As as uh Ginger stated, um we are going to increase that. So, um, instead of once a year, um, you know, for GCX at the George Crime Information Center, um, we're going to do it once a month. So, it's it's, um, our lieutenant that, uh, runs it over the at the Realtime Crime Center, uh, he'll be doing that so we can beef that up as well.

All right, I got a few more questions. Uh, how does DPD vet the departments that we share with? Do you know that they're legit? I whatever you would ask. Well, they're law enforcement agencies, you know, their background. They're verified law enforcement agencies. Verified law enforcement agencies. So, I mean, I we have no control over what backgrounds um you know, they conduct on their employees. So, I mean, they are vetted law enforcement agencies that we're that we're sharing that information with for crime purposes only.

All right. Let me ask about the Condor cameras. So what we have in system for flock is license plate readers and condor cameras and drone video footage. Yes. I and and the 911. You know gunshots detection. Okay. Detection. What what is the policy for retaining the footage from the uh drones or whatever is coming off the condor cameras? Okay. Um, I'm calling up Major Patrick Creed. He has been instrumental in setting up a real-time crime center. I'm going to have him answer this question. Good afternoon. Hi.

So, in reference to our condors and our LPRs, they mirror each other. Currently, they're 30-day retention. Unless that is taken in reference to a criminal investigation, then that will be downloaded and saved for the entirety of the investigation or whatever retention laws are associated. So if it's involved in a homicide, that is going to be kept through the duration. That's moved over to our platform which we use as evidence.com and that data is held there. Other data that isn't used that is captured, so license plate reads from our public roadways, those are deleted and it's a hard delete after 30 days. Our drone footage is 180 days currently and that's put on our transparency page. So if that is taken over for a criminal investigation or something we used in a law enforcement capacity that'll be pushed over to evidence.com also. Uh we also and you did not include we also have Raven so gunshot detection. So those alerts are also kept there too

for 180 days for 30 days.

For 30 days. Okay. Um the it seems like flock staff has access to our footage. Is that true? access to our data or footage. Blockstaff has helped us in many ways integrate and access a lot of our databases. Some stuff that we've worked in an alpha or beta format. So, we've brought their engineers into our real-time crime center to ensure that things working effectively. So, we've had them inside of our system under agreement. So, nothing has been done without us being notated or advised that's going on. Now, there's other data that's used within their contracts which I'll let them speak to, but that is as they'll they'll refer to it as scrub data uh that they use from and actually I won't even speak to that because I'm not an expert to it, but I'll happily let them do that.

Oh, okay. Yeah, I would like to hear that. Um, yep. That result. Are they here to respond to that? No, no, he's coming. Flock is You have to come to the microphone. She's advis I'm sorry. She's advising that the chief legal officer is on Zoom and so he's joining remotely. Oh, I see. Thank you. Hi everyone. Yes, if the question is about the small amount of data that uh our contract gives us the ability Do me a favor please and speak as loud as you can.

Sure. Yes. Hi, my name is Dan Haley. I'm the chief legal officer at Flock. Uh our our contract gives us the ability to use a small amount of data uh that is um stripped of metadata and that is used to uh improve the services both to Dunway Dunwy and nationwide. Um and an example of that would be uh it's used to improve the accuracy of the cameras. So for example, Georgia might have a bsentennial license plate that's different color um different color scheme, different design uh and that has to be tested. It's tested on that tiny amount of data. It's less than 1% of all data um deidentified and that's what that is used for.

You're saying that that data can't be tied to dummy? Uh it's stripped. If you take a photograph, for example, on your phone, it'll tell you where it was taken, what time it was taken, what kind of camera was used. All that data is stripped out. So, no, it can't be. But it's a it's a Georgia license plate. That's correct. Okay. So, all right. And then that is used overseas as well. You've got gig workers who view that what you're calling stripped data. View what is stripped data? Well, stripped images. Yes. question.

Okay. Um, do you take the strip data from the Dominated Police Department and it's shown overseas? Workers overseas. It's not shown overseas. It's a very common thing for uh workers um overseas to perform that kind of very manual work, but they're not they're not doing anything with the images other than testing them for quality. Okay. Um, thank you. Let me go back to our police department. The Condor cameras do not have facial recognition. Is that true or false? They do not.

They do not. So, if you took a picture of me and you wanted to search for me in the city and you put it on out to the Condor cameras, you could not find me.

I could not. So, based on your facial recognition, if you're asking if we could use a third-party tool that we could take a picture with my cell phone right now of your face and run that through a third party tool to identify through facial recognition. Those exist. That is not in the Flock ecosystem. That is not what our Condor cameras do. That's not what that ecosystem does. Are there third party tools made that we could take any picture taken and run that through facial recognition? that does exist, but that is not in the flock ecosystem or a part of our real-time crime center. Okay. We're sharing with organizations that are coded as delete and do not use. What are they?

So, there's a few. There's some that are do not use. There's some that are do not share. And there are some are uh DNU, so delete. Some of those are decommissioned that haven't been wearleled out of our system yet. So, they're decommissioned. So, they're do not use. They don't exist anymore. That might be a pri prior agency or customer flock that was a part of that database that has then been removed. So now they're moved into a do not use category and eventually wear leveled out of that system. Uh do not share. We've notified some of ours. So we integrate private party cameras into our system. We title that and that's only live data. There's nothing retained. So even if it were shared, we can't share that live data and it can't be pulled through retention. So it doesn't exist. But we also title it with do not share just so it's a notifier and easily identified.

Okay. Let me sum up what you've said about our doughy data. Our doughy data can be stripped down and shipped out of the city. I didn't say that. Not that the the flock attorney said that. Dan said that. Is it I I got the impression that we owned this data full stop. We we we control it. Yeah. What do you think about whether we own this data? We own our data.

Okay. Then how is he getting how is block getting the strip down data? That's a specific contractual provision. Again, it's very common in any contract where a vendor is dealing with data and it's a small amount of data, less than 1% that is stripped of identifying information and used to improve the system. Um, these are photographs of cars on public roadways. Just to be clear, right now I'm asking Well, I'm sorry. Well, I'm attorney don't have a technical answer to that question, but I can say that to the extent that that's a contractual provision,

I mean, we can address that in the contract that we're drafting now to make that clear to eliminate that or we can request that Flock consider doing that. I haven't spoken to to Flock Legal about that, but that is a loophole that we can close as we're negotiating this MSA. Okay. Just to be clear, it's not a loophole. It's for It's for system quality and Well, you Dan have system quality with all these different agencies. I mean, hey, my name's Holly. I just Wow. Do you mind if I explain what the deidentified data is used for in plain language?

So, my name is Holly. I work for Flock. Excuse me. Excuse me. I also feel like We're allowed to provide comment as well and answer the question. No, no, no, we're not.

Um, you asked about how the data how we can ensure the data is accurate. License plates change. In Tennessee a couple of years ago, there was a white license plate. They changed it to a black license plate with a black background. In order to make sure that the alerts are actually as accurate as possible to ensure that the police department gets the most accurate information possible, the machine learning needs to be trained on that data. So, it needs to be trained. If we turn if the state turns the license plate from a white background to a black background, we need to actually be able to strip that data, feed it into a machine learning model. again strip data and actually to ensure that the misreads are not there that our data is actually as accurate as possible so that the police department has accurate data. Does that make sense?

Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Catherine. Okay.

The attorney. Okay. You're confusing this. Okay. Please. No, no. We have there's rules and there's Robert's rules of orders and there's a way we run this meeting and we are trying okay please let us get the information we need. You've asked us no let we Okay. Okay. All right. Did you have more questions, Katherine, for the attorney? No. No. Okay. Can What's the attorney's name? I can't remember. Dan. Dan.

Dan.

It This is like a really probably technical question, but the example of the license plates. Okay. It seems to me that if Georgia came out with six new license plates, different colors, that you could replicate that without using real data for D. So, so I want to be clear because I think the room needs to hear this. There's a bazillion communities using this technology. You can test it somewhere else. So, that's but but but my point is is that it feels like to me if there's six new license plates, you could replicate it and just test to see if it works on those pretend or fake or volunteers. No, they strip the data. No. No. Okay. Okay. Okay. Right. But it feels like you could get that data without taking our data is all I'm saying. Okay. Sh. Okay. Now, does anybody else have questions? Uh I know I'm getting there. I'm asking Rob, Tom.

Um I don't have questions. I'm just very frustrated by behavior in this room. It's appalling. We're trying to get information. We're trying to listen to people and the disruptions are ridiculous. Um Uh, thank you. Uh, I so I got a I got a few questions. Um, and it's probably going to be all over the board. Some for DPD, some for Ginger, some for uh probably our attorney, and some for Flock's attorney as well. So, um, I'm going to start with the when you were talking about like the the the access for for data uh uh for for access to the system and data access. Um, one of the one of the responses or bullet points was that Flock would consider uh real-time access alerts. I would like that to be a provision of the contract that I consider I mean I I would like to know unless there's a compelling reason that you feel that's not necessary, Chief. I'd like for there to be real time alerts when people are so that we so DPT knows when outside agencies are accessing our system. And I don't want that to be a consideration. want that in unless like I said there's a compelling reason not to have that and

I can I mean from the contract standpoint that's certainly something we can address. I don't know that there's a I don't know about the compelling reason aspect. I was just asking unless chief said that there is a reason why from from Dumby's perspective that was not a smart idea. So the only comment I would have is that you know it takes a little while for technology to roll out for things like that. So, I would say maybe we give them time to build it in also. Okay. It's not something that they're necessarily going to have right now tomorrow turned on. I mean, it's reasonable, but it but it seems like a relatively I mean, I'm not a technology person, but it seems like a simp relatively simple ask. So,

Tom Tom, can I I I think Jill, I think this is what I hear. One of the parts that we want to get away from is flock determining what a breach is versus a a disclosure. I think what I'm hearing is when someone is accessing our stuff, we want to be notified. Period. Spot on. Yeah. That and we're going to get away from the from the from the designation of what does the word breach mean? It's kind of like what does is mean? We want to know when our stuff is being accessed in some kind of notification in real time. I think that's what you're saying. Is that right? Yes. And I think we can do that in the contract.

And while we're on the subject of breaches, I just want to ask the question because one of the one of the red or amber, whatever color it was on there, um how do you reconcile that there's a statement that there's been no breaches, but yet there's publicized breaches? How do how do we take that? Where do we what do we do with that?

Right. So, that is something that we are addressing in the contract to ensure that there's a definition because our current state is that we do not have anything in the contract right now that states what a breach is. And so, the definition of a breach is differing. And so, we're trying to ensure that there is a specific definition in the future contract. Well, without getting too deep into into the semantics, what is Flock's response to saying that there haven't been any breaches, but if there there's documented breaches online? Flock's attorney answer that. Yeah.

Yeah. There are not documented breaches online. There's documented uh attempts to intrude on a single camera online. And that is like saying if someone hacks into your iPhone, Apple has been breached. It's simply a different con concept. Um, the gentleman who made the YouTube video purporting to hack into a camera acknowledged at the front end of that video that that camera had been obtained uh, illicitly um, had been accessed without ever being connected to our network, which means it never got a security feature uh, and never got a single update. Um, and that is just a very different thing from a data breach. Uh, our system, our environment has never been breached and that doesn't mean it never will be, by the way. And if it does, there are very clear legal requirements as to notification uh both of the government and of clients. And we would of course abide by those.

I'm I'm sorry to interrupt, but just really quick, I did want to point out that the breach that I was referring to was actually in Brook Haven and Cob County versus someone obtaining a camera. That was the one I was actually referring to. Mhm.

I believe you're referring to a misconfiguration of the SIM card on a number of cameras by Verizon, which is one of our vendors. We have addressed that with Verizon and for a period of time, uh, if someone were on the dark web, um, they could find a link to a small number of cameras that were live streaming. Um, I would note that if you go right now to the internet, you can find dozens of cameras live streaming in New York Central's part in New York Central Park. That doesn't mean that it's not wasn't a problem that those cameras were misconfigured. But uh that was addressed that was an error by Verizon which is one of our vendors were of course responsible for it. But again that is not a system breach.

Yeah. And I can just clar I mean Dan is correct that the the data breach concept is a legally you know that is a legally technical term. We can call it an incident security incident unauthorized access whatever we want to call it. But the point is, I think to to Ken's point is that, you know, we can build in so that we would get real time notice of any any unauthorized access of any kind. The council should know we take our obligations very seriously with regard to data breach. If there were a breach, there are very serious consequences if we were were to fail to fulfill those obligations, including, of course, client notification. Let me follow up on that. Why did you remove gross negligence for breaches from the contract?

I'm sorry. Gross negligence. You removed that for breaches from the contract. Are you referring to our updated MSA? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, the updated MSA does nothing to the agreement with uh with Dunwy. As um Jill mentioned, um we are negotiating a new MSA with Dunwy, but our standard online terms have no effect on an existing contract with Dunwy or anyone else. So it was removed from the terms of service and does it affect it was removed from our standard terms which are our starting point for negotiation with any new client.

But why? Yeah, why did you remove it? We update our terms all of the time to make them more consistent with industry standards. Okay. Uh sorry Tom, keep going.

That's good. And I this this next question might be for someone from PD. I'm not sure who would be the best person to respond to it. Uh or uh I just want to clarify or Ginger you may know this too. What what platforms on flock because I think there's some confusion I know with the data sharing. What is it only the LPRs that outside agencies have access to? Um is is there is there Condor? Is there uh drone or any other platform or is it just the LPRs that outside agencies have access to? Primarily it's just the LPRs, but we do share some of our live view cameras with Shambly and Brook Haven since they directly share a border with those cameras that could be beneficial for any in progress crimes. Those are the only two other agencies we share live video cameras with.

But those are the only two agencies we're currently sharing live. Correct. Okay. Uh anything live view is definitely strictly reviewed and on a case by case and since sister sister partner agencies that share borders that's who we share with.

So so any any data obtained from those cameras that's all within Dunwy. It's it's the LPRs that has the wider um data sharing and access from other agencies. Okay. That's all I have for now. Thanks. Um, first I would just like to agree with my colleague um, Rob on um, the comments of the behavior. I find it ironic that we had a citizen come in front of us complaining about children on the green and kind of I don't know maybe we need to address some adult behavior. Um, remind me with the master service agreement um, when was it last done and updated? just I I honestly don't know.

So that is one of the issues that we've had is that um it's not clear. I I think the I think the short answer is 2022 possibly. But it's it's the the contractual structure of of the relationship between the city and flock has been discovered to be messy. So that is why we are going to clean it up with the new MSA. Okay. So the deliverable to us is going to be you know because we have added different components throughout the years and so it's going to be all one master service agreement MSA so that we kind of everybody is on the same page

and so how this typically works in contracting is there's an MSA and then there will be you know to the extent that there's subsequent order forms or purchase orders or scopes of work or whatever the case may be those are added into the MSA as agenda but the that one MSA is the master contract that has the terms that govern all of those all of that rel all of those relationships. So there will not be separate purchase orders or separate orders or separate documents floating out there that have different and conflicting terms. Everything will be contained within that one MSA document. Okay. Does that make sense? Yes, it does. And I know that we obviously both talk with our hand. Sorry. The MSA.

MSA. Um and I guess just kind of on a you know our number one job that I feel in the city is public safety. Um, and I certainly respect our officers and the people who are on the street. Um, and that, you know, just having had to call 911 a couple times myself to be able to talk directly to an officer would be, you know, is amazing. And, um, I certainly embrace that technology wholeheartedly. Um, on a personal note, couple weeks ago, I went down to Pullman Yards for an event. My I was with my daughter and she got us into the parking lot on her phone and I and we met my husband there. I ended up leaving early. She left with my husband and we forgot to check out of the parking. Within 24 hours, the parking company had found my phone that was not part of the parking because through the license plate leader had texted me three times, emailed me twice, and then I got a letter in the mail saying that I hadn't paid for my parking. So, I guess I kind of look at it, they're using the LPR for profit. Um, in Dumboody, we're using the LPRs for public safety. And I think there's a vast difference between the two. Um, that being said, I really look forward to a better master service agreement and so that we all know what is in there and that we can and that we're moving forward with everybody on the same page with DPD knowing that they have to have the strong policies and that we are watching and we are asking the questions and that we need to keep the public safe. Um, I you know I thank you for for working on that. Don,

I'll just thank council and everybody for working on this issue. It's important. I think we're moving forward. I appreciate Jill the work that you're doing on it. Um, Dunway police officer, I guess Tim, he was mentioning the live video feeds. I correct me if I'm wrong. Did we uh have an agreement with Georgia State that just went live? Are we sharing with them yet or is that in the future? Uh, that's soon to be uh put together. Yes. Okay. Okay. We have a mutual uh understanding that we're going to be sharing cameras for better response and enhancement of security for their campus. Okay. And they are inside the city of Dunwy and they are a private flock contractor. I guess they're not really ours or somebody else much like maybe the mall. Do we share with the mall then as well? Yes. Well, the mall shares with us. We do not share with them.

Got it. Um anyway, I appreciate all the questions. I appreciate all that we're doing. I do appreciate that we're looking at the uh this subject. It's important and I'm looking forward to hearing more when we get more information. Thank you. Yeah.

This more on ginger internal controls. All right. Talk about external users. So again I'm coming from a systems background Oracle etc etc. Um when we we talk about provisioning and deprovisioning external user accounts giving them log on passwords. Um do we uh like to hear just a teeny bit about that? I know we don't want to, you know, tell too much in the public realm. Um do are we able to also segregate on the data schema and the security level for those users? So do they just have everything or can they say we can filter it by a certain type of data and certain range of further subsets? Um I'd just like to hear how that whole how do we give people provision deprovision grant access and what kind of levels of access do they have?

Uh so for internally I can control that we have roles and permissions within that. So we have administrators owners and also just users and we can break it off by position and role within the department and allow uh certain access and cut off certain access to those users within our inside agency. I don't have control of outside agencies of what their users are doing. Okay, great. But you're we're granting those outside folks a login access to the LPR data. Do we give them an account? Do they literally have an account and a password login and you you have to set it and send them a link or

No, it's aou and they have access from their other agencies and we give access to the agency that are already flock customers. So the ARF are going through their security procedures and authorizations from that agency. Interesting. Okay. Thanks. Um and on the legal side, MSAs are also interesting with different vendors. Um not to go with this flock, but we have a lot of other IT systems we're using. We have a lot of other vendors. They're onrem or in the cloud and so on. So I'd be curious, Jinger, not for tonight, but in the future, are there other vendors that we're doing a lot of other things with? And do we have that type of same type of model as an MSA potentially that aids like Microsoft and so on? Just curious.

Yes. So that's what we've been working on with um Jill Jill usually handles the technical contracts with us, but that is that is kind of a an initiative we've been working on over the last few years. And that is the typical model and we're trying to to get all of the agreements under that typical model to the extent possible. That's okay, Tom. Go ahead. um with with the uh with the LPRs um the data that people are that we're sharing actually because the LPRs are still I know when they initially are I just want to confirm it's it's a it's taking a picture it's not an actual video correct so it's a point in as a vehicle drives by it snaps a picture ident grabs whatever identifying information is that accurate yes only still images

so when we're sharing data is that someone putting in I'm I'm sure there's multiple things but is it like they're looking for a specific vehicle or they have a a bolo or a stolen vehicle. Is that part of the data sharing where they're just they are we sharing like tag numbers where they're looking for a specific vehicle? What type of information would an outside agency have through that system?

Yeah. So, they're going to have to type in like a specific tag number or partial tag number of somebody that they're investigating for a crime. They're not just going pouring through our data just endlessly. They have to have some specific criteria in order to access our data. And that would return to them that that vehicle had driven past a specific camera in the city. Um, in essence, correct? I mean, yeah, it would share the still image. It also show and the GPS coordinates where that image was captured.

And could it also flag and alert them if that vehicle were to come in at a later date? So, for example, they put it in the system um and there was that vehicle hadn't driven through Duny yet, but two weeks from now that vehicle there's a hit on that tag number. Would that they could put on a hot list where they get notified if that vehicle does drive past a flaw camera, right? Okay. That existed before, right?

And and that's very common use. So, like the cab fugitive unit, they're accessing or identified a murder suspect that they were looking to locate. They are going to put that information into the system to all their sharing networks. They may locate that that murder suspect is residing currently in Dunwy or just past uh LPR or Ashford Dunwy or in Shambley Atlanta or any other location that will dictate where that unit goes to apprehend the offender. But that's essentially the only information they're getting, right? So there's no personal It's just Yes. Exactly. We know that vehicle is driven into Dunwhati now they can take appropriate action. Yes, sir. Okay.

Okay. Anybody else? Okay. So, I have just a couple of questions kind of from last time. So, to follow up or to build on Tom's questions, one of the things I found very confusing about the report a few weeks ago was is the number of agencies that are looking at our data from across the country. So, I get sharing with Shambley and Sandy Springs and Metro Atlanta and maybe the rest of the state of Georgia, right? We're very popular here. We have a popular mall. Lots of people come here. I don't understand some of the examples you gave us from a thousand miles away. It feels like that those should be so few and far between that they could pick up the telephone and ask us to enter the data. like it it feels like if I it just and I realize that there were so many that there's no way for you to know why they were looking at our database, but I there just got to be and this is really when we get ready. It just feels like that's opening us up to fishing by bad actors and because I don't understand why somebody from Sunni or whatever the Sunny, you know, the State University of New York needed to look at our LPR data because if it's if someone is that significant of a risk, it feels like at a minimum they should pick up the phone and let you know they might be in our city. And so I'm I don't know how to fix it because I'm a big fan of a lot of this technology. But that makes very little sense to me because back in the day, if I was in New York City and I thought the guy robbing the jewelry store was going to have to was headed to Dunwy, I would pick up the phone and let you know, which I think actually in that scenario they may have done that, but or let the FBI know. But I just I'm I feel

like there's I don't want to limit our access to other this feels a little wrong and a little challenging that everyone can uh sorry I lost my train of thought that everyone can it just feels like there should be a level of protection. There's there's reasonleness. There's a reasonable search parameter. And maybe y'all you can tell me you're wrong. you can tell me how often are we looking outside the state of Georgia uh at this kind of data? Maybe that's the way to start the question.

Well, you know, Major Creek alluded to um we were working a uh a serial jewelry robber that was coming and it was coming down the east coast. Well,

um with our alerts, we were able to put that vehicle in the alert status and we knew when they were coming, very violent criminals coming down here to to Dunwy. We were we were working in conjunction with the FBI because they do not have that technology. They had additional technology which they were tapping into their uh their phone system a T3 wire is what they call it multiple I mean even when we were drawing up our initial contract um I remember Jill wanted to exclude I believe it was Albany right Albany Georgia where we had a nexus to many many crimes we have a nexus of 41 individuals that were from Albany that were committing crimes here just in Dunwy so it's nationwide you can't rely on a Um you can but that's old technology. This is this is real time.

Okay. But those are two those are examples and those are good examples. The jewelry thing was humongous and huge and the Albany thing is interesting. But what I'm trying to figure out is you told us there was like 1,200 agencies. So there were numbers last time. It was like 1,200. I'm making up the number agencies that were looking in and then but we were only looking at 400. And so all I'm asking is is that we work with Flock or y'all figure it out internally how to make sure that we are coming up with a system that doesn't restrict your ability to police and to solve crimes. You know, I'm all about that. but allows us to have some sense that someone isn't just being and maybe I misunderstand if I'm in New York City to look at our data I have to enter a license plate.

So when we're talking about access and looking at our data, we're talking about users that have access to search our data. So it is not individuals that are looking at that data. That's people that have went in partnership agreements to look at it. I understand your example of the campus police in New York, right?

The issue is they would never know to call Dunwy, nor would we know to call them if our kidnapping offender snatched a child and his next loan known location was on that campus that we shared that data. We would never think to call New York at a college campus and go, "Will you check your cameras and see if our offenders there?" Through connectivity and us working together, we're able to communicate across all borders and identify if our criminal offender has left our jurisdiction, which they often do. 92% I believe within our crimes, our part one crimes are happening from offenders outside of our city.

So these offenders are moving across county lines, city lines, and state lines. I could go on all day about I want I'm trying to understand. Yes, ma'am. And I think it would help other people to understand. So when that Sunni, I would assume a member of law law enforcement entered whatever he was or she was looking for, did they enter it for Dunwy or they entered it in some big picture system that then looked in our system? I totally don't. They they entered it into their database and it checked all networks they share with. So if I I could put it on to us saying we share with them. Okay.

We had a criminal incident Brook Park. Just a scenario theoretical child was taking red vehicle known tag Florida tag. We would check our database immediately for all hits where that tag has been in the past 30 days and where it might be real time. That next hit may be in Birmingham, Alabama because it was reported three and a half hours later. We would otherwise never know that. Nor would we know to call let's call Birmingham and just have them check. Okay. So the I'm just trying to understand. Yes, ma'am. So when someone enters a license plate that they're looking for a felon or whatever, they're not specifically entered in Dunwy.

No, they are not. But some technology vehicle is searching all the databases that are connected. Yes, ma'am. So then it shows up as one of the 1200 agencies that has looked at our data or those 1200 agencies aren't the ones that have looked at our data. Those are,200 agencies that we're sharing. Okay. So, what some of those agencies may have never looked in data that touched on to Dunley, but they have the ability in their sharing. Does that make sense? Am I explaining that?

Yeah, I think so. So, so when you when us when we enter a license plate, the search thing does its thing and you don't know where it's looking. It's it's in the connected If if we have a hit, if if we put in data, if you have a hit, we put the data in. We're searching our entire sharing net. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Okay. And remember, one of our questions last week was why we are the 400 and the,200. Why they're different?

The 400 I believe it was 480 that we're currently requesting sharing access because that's all we've requested sharing access from. uh we could manipulate those numbers and for this meeting turn that into 2,000 sharing networks by just shooting pure requests but we haven't done that because this is how we've operated we've identified these 480 at this time we believe we need to get access to their data and they've shared it hasn't been 1,200 agencies have denied us access we have not requested it yes go ahead

so I just want to make sure that I understand so when it god forbid we have an Amber alert right come out So, if we have an Amber Alert from from Dunwy and it that goes out, then you're putting in because the Amber Alert always comes usually comes with a license plate. Yes, ma'am. So, then you're you're putting that into the search and it is searching for 450 agencies and hoping to god we find a hit. Yes, ma'am. Okay. And if it hasn't found the hit, we're probably immediately putting requests to additional agencies in a broader scale to continue to try to locate this vehicle. So simultaneous because I think this is important. There are other tools you have too, right? Like there's national crime, whatever those. Okay.

Yes. And then the other thing that concerns me is is the um which we talked about a little bit and I think Jill's going to is trying to address it which is the either immediately notifying someone that internally someone's accessed or um you know like dual whatever it's called when you get a code on your phone that you multifact something that adds a layer. I can speak to that. We have multifactor associate. Yes, we do though. And every time I log in, I have multi factor authentication. Notifications also.

I'll speak to we have like you stated many uses of technology outside of not just fly

and NCIC, the National Crime Information Center being our most pertinent information that is secured and we are ultimately put through annual training and it is audited yearly per their requirements. But with that data we get that it pulls in and we ultimately feed that data to their office through their login. They do not have multiffactor. It's above that. And their auditing system is annually. Flock is the only system we have that has ever built an algorithm that has notified us of any type of bias or anything we needed to. We would love all our vendors to do that. We would love automated systems like Councilman Lambert stated that would notify us that there's something we need to look at. None of our other vendors do it. We only have one that has been producing that for us. And we're we're appreciative of that. We hope it pushes this technology phase to ultimately require all entities and tech use to do things like that because auditing on a monthly or weekly or yearly database on every search is we're only going to hit a minute part of that to identify that it's being used appropriately. So any type of identifier used through AI or notification system is a huge benefit to us and this vendor is actually the one supporting us with it.

Okay, one last question about effectiveness. So I see the data from um the LPRs and all that the closed I'm all about solving crimes. Are we looking at each of the tools on a regular basis? Not just the LPRs, like the gunshot sound. What are they called? Raven to see that it's showing its value because I'm assuming we're paying for that, too. Yes, ma'am.

Are we regularly evaluating that as a tool and deciding Yeah. All of them the I mean I know the drone and all that but so we have a system not just an audit system to make sure that all the security is working but also something in place that says at the end of the day I would use this keep this tool. Yes ma'am. Yes. And and I could speak to that at length uh here or at another time. You don't need to address it but I just want to make sure. Um I have do have another question. Sorry. So with Raven is is it effective? Yes, ma'am.

You've found victims or arrested people from it.

So one of our initial outputs for Raven, the PCI district in Raven is covered paid through PCID and we appreciate that because we truly believe if a gunshot occurs, we do not want to wait for even the 911 call to be dialed to connect through Flock OS 911. We want to be instantaneously alerted and in route because it's such a densely populated area. But another area which council and the city has approved was PIB. And this was an area where we were receiving a fair amount of violent crime and guns crimes involving guns and we were not receiving reported 911 calls associated. So we knew there was violence. We knew there were gunshots and we knew there was a community that wasn't comfortable calling 911 for assistance at that time. When put in place, within days, we got our first gunshot alert. We had officers in place. We recovered the casings within three meters of the location of the triangulated gunshot detection. We sent it out to Nans and we've been out to that community multiple times in a very positive manner and trying to assist them through gun violence.

Okay. Anybody else? Thank you. Thank you all. Oh, did somebody say yes? No. Okay. Thank you. All right. Next is consent. Does anybody have any questions or comments? John approved. Moved by John. Second by Councilman Lenbucker. Uh any questions or comments? I'm thrilled we're fixing the tennis courts. All right. All in favor say I. Any opposed? Hearing none. The motion carries. Thank you, Chief. I think you're back. I'm I'm going to make a recommendation on 10. Uh, Madame Mayor. Okay.

One of the things we'd like to do is get that MSA in place before we approve another flock contract. So, I'm recommending that we defer this. I think it's the April 13th meeting. Is that the next meeting? We defer number 10 till the April 13th meeting at which time we believe we'll have the MSA on the agenda to be able to pro uh consider it first before you consider number 10. Okay. So, I need a motion to defer. Just go ahead. One question. The the flock 911 will continue, right? Like we have time for this, Chief. Like, I mean, they're not going to hit end, right? That's correct. Yes, ma'am. Okay. I just want to make sure you guys still have the technology. Okay.

Before we made that recommendation, we met with technology. We met with city manager, met with Jill and Ginger and the chief. So, this is a group discussion, but I think it's appropriate based on where we are. Right. All right. Move to defer the Oh, go ahead. Finish. Move to defer the um 9flock OS91 contract to the April 13th meeting. Second. Uh moved by Stacy, second by Rob. Um is April 13th long enough? I guess it's three weeks because there's a fifth Monday in May. Jill Jill can comment on what she thinks.

I mean, I think that we'll have a draft ready. We're negotiating the draft now. Let's call it seven to 10 days that we'll have a final draft between me and Flock. So, yes, I think that's Yeah, we're very there's a problem, we'll defer it again. Just defer it again. Okay. Flock's also on the meeting and he's nodding his head. We'll we'll very happily make that happen. Okay. Thank you. All right. All in favor of the motion to defer say I. Any opposed? Hearing none. Um, that passes unanimously. Thank you. All right, Michael Smith.

Oh, disappointing, but Michael's not here with us this evening. Michael was here a second ago. Oh, he's here.

Uh, David, David, uh, public works, uh, mayor, council, uh, tonight before you is, uh, we're requesting a contract for signal sign and street light maintenance. Uh our existing contract expires at the end of this month. Uh we uh recently obtained proposals. We received uh five responses, had some excellent candidates, but uh and we also work with Brook Haven on this. So they'll also independently be uh joining in on this contract. Uh it was structured to where uh the proposers agreed to provide services to not only us but to Brook Haven. Of course all of our costs will be independent. Uh that we evaluated them based on uh uh their approach uh their experience the performance of similar type work. Uh we have selected a Sunb Belt Traffic Systems uh I'm sorry Sunbelt Traffic LLC who currently has our contract and uh you can see the uh matrix that we evaluated them on. We had five firms respond and we had some great firms responding uh in all categories. Sunb Belt uh traffic uh was uh high scoring and we're requesting the approval of this contract.

Okay. Does anybody have questions? Uh go ahead Rob. This is on call basically when something is not working they typically per year. How much do we spend for this just for my own uh interest? I I do not know that. Uh that is a budgetary item but uh I do not have the answer to that. Right. I I don't think it's critical for this but I would be just curious for for and we I can get you a response on that. Uh John, go ahead. Yes, sir.

David, a while back we had a contract I think to exchange or change out signs certain percentage signs. This is different from that contract. Uh it it's it was probably performed by Sunb Belt uh under uh their existing service contract, but we are that's correct. They they would perform that type of uh work that was most likely funded if we uh changed the signs out. That was most likely funded by

There was a segment of the city that we're doing in this year we're doing uh let's call what's maybe Kingsley or whatever it is. We're going to change out all the signs. I'm just wondering if this is related. Is that separate? If we needed if there's a sign in Joe's neighborhood and he wanted it to change out, is that separate or is that part of this contract?

The other one you're talking about was with Big Apple. We piggybacked on a Brook Haven contract with that and we're using that more for blanket sign replacement like where we're doing a 100 or 200 at one time. We also included that the ability to replace signs in this contract just to have since Sunb Belt's here working on signals a lot. If we have a stop sign that's down and we just need somebody to run out and replace it, they can do that, but they they will not do the 200 sign replacements. We have another contract for that. Okay. And that's in place that Apple contract moving forward. Yes. Great. Thank you so much.

Anybody else? So, wait, Michael? So the 200 sign like the big replacements this stop it. This contract is for when a stop sign falls down. Yeah. This is just when we have a one offer we need to do quickly. Yeah. Okay. And the 200 the s I thought there was some rule like we had to replace street signs and stuff.

Yes. Yeah. We're we're doing sections of the city at a time because we have to maintain the retroreflectivity. That's the ability to see it at night to have it reflect. We have to do that every 12 years or so is what it looks like. We we test it to make sure it meets a minimum requirement. It looks like about 12 years is how long they'll last before they have to be upgraded. So that's an ongoing thing kind of like paving. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other questions? No, this is actually a business item. We have to vote on it because we're other contract. Well, that actually Wait, wait, wait. How did we get

We need to be careful that we don't get to the last few weeks of a contract before we need to renew it. So, just something to keep in mind for the future. Eric. All right. Need a motion. Approve. Moved by Joe, second by Rob. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I call the question. All in favor say I. I. Ginger, you are back. Hello again. Hello. Okay, so we are gonna discuss really quick the GIS services contract, but I wanted to take a really quick moment, if that's okay, and introduce you guys to the GIS manager in case you haven't met her. Of course.

So, this is Don Abberrombi and she's joining us as the new GIS manager. Hi. It's nice to meet everybody and I look forward to working with all the citizens and staff and council.

Thank you. We're welcome. So the ask on the table tonight is to roll out a new GIS services contract with geographic technologies group. Um they are working with several of our neighboring agencies and we have started working with them on a strategic plan and they are doing a phenomenal job. So, we would like to extend the contract and actually do a uh GIS services agreement with them, get them to help us roll out some of these strategic plan ideas that we're going to be working on. And the ask is for $108,000. That is already in the budget for 2025. Oh, 2026, sorry, be 2026, but that is in the budget for 2026 for the GIS um position. Any uh questions or comments? All right, this is an action item to approve.

Moved by John. Second. Second by Katherine. Any further discussion or questions? Seeing none, I call the question. All in favor say I. Uh all right, Ginger. Sorry, you're back. Hello. Sorry. Okay. So, this this last item that I have on the table is uh the lease of three replacement printers for the PD. It is working with Milner, which is the company that we do our leases with. We are bringing it out to you guys because it is a multi-year and we bring multi-year for approval from the council.

Move to approve. M moved by John, second by Rob. Um the we lease not buy right that's best practices we do. Yes that's that's for copers particularly. Yes. So we can replace them on a regular basis and make sure that they continue working. Yes. Okay. Um any further discussion or questions? Seeing none I call the question. All in favor say I. I. Chief.

Mayor and councel. Um, so I put on the agenda uh for the approval of the contract with Claritel. Um, if you recall uh we've had a behavioral clinician uh for several years now. Uh, however, we hired the last one as a public safety ambassador. Um, we saw how important it was um to have these clinicians um come out to the scene actually and um able to handle somebody that's experiencing a mental health crisis. um not only they trained to deescalate but um if we need to in fact uh what we call 1013 them which means it's an involuntary hold um they're able to make that uh recommendation. Um it goes beyond that meaning they do a lot of follow-up cases. So if if us as officers, if we go out there and actually encounter somebody that was experienced a mental health crisis that didn't rise to the level of a 1013, these clinicians will go on behind and go ahead and do a followup with them to check with them and literally go out to the uh to their residents, knock on the door, you okay? Call them um to get get them the help that we need. Uh we hired the last one. So right now we're a behavioral health clinician. Um, so we reached out to uh Clarel and told us what what they can offer, what choices do we have because we want to get this program up and running again because uh the effect that it had. Um, you know, and having Peachford Hospital here, it it just speaks volumes of what it could do. Uh, the one we looked at um cost $108,39. Um, the reason why the police department went with this one, it's going to save time because the clinician will actually have the ability to actually file the 1013 at the scene, which means we can take custody and bring them to the hospital, get the get them the help that they need. Uh, our previous clinician did not. He could go out and he was experienced very very well and he's actually helping us now uh with individuals uh with mental health uh issues. Um, but he did not. He'd have to call up to a higher level. So, um, the PD I'm asking, uh, for approval to

proceed with a one-year contract with the price that I just gave. Um, they do not have anyone hired. I I understand there's a hard date in here. That date will be adjusted. Uh, if in fact, um, they hire a clinician. Uh, and then from the date of start, then we would move on from there. I have questions. Go ahead, Chip.

Um, Chief, well, and then I have part for Chief, part Eric. If this is we want to get we have a lot of contracts for services that are just ongoing and then personnel change and so on. So can you like level set background because uh shouldn't we just have a contract ongoing uh and then if they get the new person come and goes the the the third party that we have the contract term we just staff that. So I mean I'd support look this is super important. And I because I really think this is awesome that we're doing this and we did it, but um I want to make sure we have continuity obviously personnel change, but for longevity if we set this you you're just going to keep on staffing and filling it. It'll be embedded in the annual next next year's budgets and so on. So is that is that right?

Absolutely. Yeah. I mean that would that would make it easier than no that I could work with finance just in fact if in fact question because since it's a third party um you know if we if that I'll give you an example our first one left so I could work with finance to obviously stop the payments until you know they they replace what it's like whether we're working for low or Lowe's or ponds or whoever we had you know from our you know the just like when we re re negotiate all of our contracts

right I I mean what we have now it gives us more flexibility to have it as a annualized piece like what the chief's proposed here to do that um and if you remember this was a newer service that we added during the COVID time period as part of the ARPA uh funding and so what we'd like to do until we find the exact you know right person right fit and this could be something we bring in house at some point in the future but right now we want to keep it just like this and have it as this contract model because it's it's worked for us to this to this point we also share this if you remember with the city of Dorville and they pay a 17% 17% of this and so we don't you know we don't feel it has a has a uh a need for anything beyond what we have right now. I hope that answers your question.

Yeah, I just wanted to I almost didn't want to I I already wanted to have have it happen. That's basically it. Thanks, John.

Um I too am very supportive. Looking at the contract though, it says that uh we are only going to hire one full-time licensed clinician social worker or licensed professional counselor. The licensed aspect is very important. So you can do the 10:13 the to do what it needs to do. The question that I have is that when you hire one and they work 9 to5 but 80% of your calls are going to be at 2 in the morning. How does that happen? We are dealing with a large conglomerate of an association that probably has 40 people on staff like this. Why are we not getting dedicated service hours or dedicated time versus hiring one person based on what I'm reading in the contract?

Yeah. what it does, it just turns into an on call. So, uh, and it's proven very effective. Yes, at night obviously, you know, we're going to have um, you know, encounters with somebody that's experiencing a mental health crisis. We do have an on call um, we can speak with them um, and get the services still. I mean, yeah, I understand we can't have somebody here 20 247, but

again, I would uh just recommend that once we when the agency hires that person that we look at the credentials, make sure they can do what they need to do. And I would ask them who are who's the backup and who's the backup to the backup when that person's on vacation. They should be able to provide us our employees or our contracted employees to do the services we need. I would hate to have them provide somebody who's not qualified to do exactly, sir, what you need them to do. Yes, sir. Thank you. Uh, Katherine, Chief, this memorandum seems to indicate that it started in February.

Yeah, it was just when we drafted up, we reached out to Clarel and said, "Hey, can you please just draft up a a contract?" Um, we know that they didn't have anybody on staff that they could fill the position, so I was going to get it approved and then we can adjust the contract from there. But as uh council member um secondary mentioned, we can make it to a have a continuity, a continuous contract, and they can just fill it as needed. Are you saying this is not a filled position? So, no, it is not. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Yes. Go ahead. And is this already in our 26 budget, FY26? This amount, the funding for this? I'll check with Richard, but I believe he said it is in there. Is it is it Eric? Yes. I mean, we did we did set money aside for this. Yes.

I I like the staff memo for the other two op option that literally showed that it's already budgeted in the staff memo. So, I know this is an action item. It's not a discussion. So, do do we have a reasonleness check whether this is coming from our current operating budget or is it going to come from reserve? This is coming from the operating budget. We had this already. We've been do having this position in the past, right? So, it just the person um the person left. Thanks. We promote it. We promote it. Hire the person. That's right. The next one. So, this Claritel used to be the Dicab That's correct. Just so people know, DICE service board. Yes, ma'am. They just changed correct organizations. I don't know the extent and the all that.

That's correct. They certainly change names. And one of the things that felt when I was talking to other mayors about stuff and I think it would be helpful is they do they did a heat map or they did a study to figure out when the calls were coming in like if we could just look and they were they were looking at primarily at unhoused and trying to figure out when to have the support there and they what they found was surprising in term they thought it would be overnight in this case it wasn't and um so I think that if we it would be helpful for y'all to have some data so that as we negotiate with clarel if we need to make changes I mean these are hard hard hard positions to fill

and you know finding people that want to do the jobs stick with the jobs and then want to work odd hours is probably a big lift. Um, and then in my ideal scenario, which is ideal, it would be nice if we could fi if they could send someone who has at least some experience with the unhoused. I know that that's a not necessarily universal and we need someone y'all need someone to support you on the calls or frankly our community needs it because when there's an interaction this person part of their responsibility is to provide services to the res the information to the families and I have had conversations with people uh families that have interacted with our former people in this position and have been able to find services uh for their family members who are in crisis. So, I think it's really important if just somebody had a little experience with the unhoused um that we also might find that helpful as well. So, um this is an action item. Oh, sorry, Rob. Go ahead.

No, you can ask. I I'm just curious. I like the fact that we're sharing this with Dorville. Are we getting a prop proportional 80% use of this person? We're getting a lot more. Yes, sir. So, so Dorville is subsidizing us a little bit basically. Yeah. They don't they don't have the amount of um calls that we do. So, um I I talked to the chief over there. So, we actually had um Julius Warren, who's our public safety, we just gave him an office here and he was here 5 days a week and would respond as necessary. So, yeah, due to the population, that's why they were only paying 17%. That's how we fig I'm I'm happy to I think it's wonderful to share the resource. I just was curious. So, thank you. Yes, sir.

Move to approve. Seconded by Katherine. Um, any further discussion? Seeing none, I call the question. All in favor say I. Uh, any opposed? Hearing none, that passes unanimously. And you are still up, Chief.

Yes, ma'am. Um, yeah, we had a a serious tragedy, uh, last year over at the Dicab County Police Department uh, with Officer Rose uh, responding to, um, an individual that was, uh, firing upon the CDC. Um during our budget hearings, uh Council Member Lot Barker um asked me, you know, hey, if if there was something that we could fund you, um what would it be? And I threw out ballistic windshields. Um there's no doubt in my mind that uh Officer Rush would probably be here today if in fact because all those rounds came right through the front of the windshield. They've been proven to stop the 5.56 round. That's the um AR-15 style round. That's what the suspect was shooting. Um, so I made that uh request. Um, we went ahead and got pricing. So the pricing would just outfit our marked vehicles, the ones that are the actual targets that are out there. Uh, our capabilities would be able to fire out of the windshield. So we would still be able to protect ourselves. Meanwhile, it would protect the officers inside the vehicle. Uh, we train, you know, how we pull up behind traffic stops and everything. We're forward facing. You know, we have that big block engine in there um that we hide behind. This would just give an added security feature and have a piece of mind for our officers knowing uh that they have that extra level of protection uh for their safety. Um we're we're also looking at getting them uh the ballistic plates as well. That'll stop that same round. Um the ask is uh for $245,98643. Um that is um for every marked vehicle that we have here. Uh, and of course there is a shelf life on them, but if the vehicle um goes out of life, you know, hits its mileage, we can still take that windshield as long as the the um um you know, they don't change the style of the Explorer, which is our main control vehicle. So that's my ask for uh this evening.

Questions, comments? Go ahead, John. Chief, this is not theoretical. This is not DAB County. This is Dunwy. And believe it or not, this has happened here before. We have had a current officer that was fired upon through his front windshield. This is not theoretical, folks. This is not, you know, what if. This has happened in the past in my last in my term on council. So, uh, I am very happy to, uh, vote for this. And I know there's other questions, but I'm just letting you know that this is not theoretical. This is done, Woody. And we've had an officer that was, uh, fired upon through the front windshield in, uh, his time here ser serving with our department. So, I'm just letting you know this is done. Woody, thank you. Uh Tom,

um yeah, I don't know if this is a question for you or for us. So, we're going to outfit all of our existing vehicles. Will this become SOP uh for um all police vehicles moving forward? Will we be outfitted with this ballistic glass? Is that something we have to approve separately or is that just going to become part of our policy? Uh that would be up to you. Yeah, I mean I would like to continue that process so when we go and get our

Yeah, I I would too. It's a great question. We we'll uh chief and I spoke about it earlier. You know, currently by the Ford Explorers for our service vehicle and so these windshields, you know, we'll go in there to begin with. What he was saying was we can if that vehicle vehicle goes out of service, we can put the windshield into the next car, but when we buy additional vehicles, we don't have enough windshields, we will buy new ones as soon as we order those vehicles. That's the plan. It just becomes part of the total cost of outfitting that car. um you we have to buy you know lights and sirens and all kinds of other equipment anyway. Yeah. I just wanted to ensure that that's that's our something going forward or if we had to do something to make that happen going forward. So okay

just to follow so if a vehicle goes out of service we can take this windshield and move it to a new vehicle if it's the same kind. Is that am I hearing that correctly? Well because we're going to keep the old windshields in storage. So depending on how model yours changed potentially their cost will be less. There would just be an installation cost rather than a product cost. It doesn't matter. We should have had I'm just curious. Go ahead. Uh Tom, just one other question. If I recall from um the last time I we discussed this, uh somebody had asked the question about is is it for putting ballistic glass on the side of the vehic if that's even a possibility? Was that something that was looked at? It

it was the the costs were astronomical. I can get that exact quote for you, but um for the side windows um you had to go in change the motors. Um it it almost it more than doubled the cost. Um so any bit of ballistic protection, but you feel comfortable with with the the procedures that your officers have for engaging that this will be a huge safety. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Is is this coming from splast? No. Reserves. Okay. Reserves. Okay. We allocated it. Okay. We did bring us the cost for the um side window side windows

but also this is not like such a big deal but when we have an incident often our I don't know what you call them leadership I don't the sergeants majors they respond as well in unmarked cars no I no since I became chief um everybody from lieutenant down is going to have a mark vehicle that will go out there yes we're we're normally the command staff yeah we're normally after the fact, but everybody that's going to be a first responder, and that's our lieutenants over patrol. I got one lieutenant over days, one lieutenant over nights, they will have mark vehicles and have those ballistic missiles in there. We're going to be coming there after the fact. I mean, granted, it could happen. I mean, I'm here. I responded to a shooting we had today. You had a shooting today. We did domestic related. Okay. Trying to survive. Okay.

Um, so I responded as well. And of course, my car is not, but So, okay. When you bring us back the numbers, it's probably just a couple of vehicles, right? Like is Teresa's car? She she will get one. She because they're marked. You're right. Okay, they're marked. Okay. All right. I believe it's 75 vehicles right now that we have advocated. Okay. That's in the cost here. Move to approve. Second. That was really fast. Move by Katherine, second by John. the the vest, the thing you're talking about.

Well, right now we're doing what we call a testing evaluation, a T& um we have two officers is it's it's added weight. It's um you know, we have outer carriers that our patrol officers have. So it what we're making sure is that it's safe, it's okay to drive, they're not going to be impeded by it. Um so as soon as and right now we've had zero complaints and they said they don't even recognize it anymore. So when we're ready, I'll come back and um uh John and ask. No, I just How did you test those? That's I didn't understand. Oh, so in other words, it's an added plate that I know I know what it is. Yeah. What do you mean test? Oh, just for just for the just just for wearing and comfort. Yeah. Functionality. Yeah.

I'd like to think the company did. Okay. Also, I just, you know, the total number looks high, but if you look at the quote per unit, it's, you know, just around 3,300 each or something. So, when you think about that for the life of someone, $3,300, about five or six uh patrol vehicles a year, just just think about the to replace to put that type of for per per vehicle is is a as a dime. I mean when I was in uh Iraqi freedom you know we didn't have the up armor Humvees at the time and we were putting sandbags on our floors and didn't have any extra I was in a soft top Humvey so you know we had armor in Afghanistan so yeah see the technology changes so I appreciate investing in that thank you

all right there's a motion on the floor um all Jessica did you get who made the motion okay all in favor say I any opposed opposed hearing. None. That passes unanimously.

Are there any discussion items? No. We are back to public comment and I am going to call out the card. If you're still here, approach the microphone. You'll have three minutes. This section is also limited to 30 minutes. Um Ali, he usually has to go to soccer. Yeah. Cameron Michaelelsson is if I've mispronounced your name or just introduce yourself, please. Uh, you'll have three minutes, sir. Hello, my name is Cameron Michaelelsson. I'm the political director for the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 77. We represent over 2,000 working people in the Southeast, many of which who live and work right here in Dunoody, Georgia. I'm here today speaking against renewing the contract with Flock. Many of the members that I represent in our industries, painting, glazing, drywall finishing, factory workers, hardworking people, are also migrants. And we know that Flock has no problem sharing their data with ICE. And other agencies like the Department of Homeland Security who seek to torture and deport and even in some cases execute these people simply for the basis of who they are. These are hardworking people who simply want to go to work every day and get home to their families and take care of their families. But currently, we live in a fascistic regime that is making that nearly impossible. Spreading fear everywhere they go, making it harder for them to stand up for their rights so that corporations can continue to milk wages from them, continue to arrest them, continue to beat them. But this is not right. This is not right at all. All they want to do is be able to do their job to make cities like Dunwoody beautiful so that people like us can have restaurants and parks and homes and hotels. But organizations like ICE and their cooperators like Flock simply seek to make that harder. They play no role

in safety. They play no role in public improvement. They play no role in social services. They only play a role in fear and spreading. And I simply think that we have an opportunity to support people to help the hardworking people that make this country run and function. We do not need to play a part in their torture and in the fear-mongering that they constantly have to suffer and that their children have to suffer not knowing if their parents are going to come home from work at the end of the day. And that their parents know that when they go to work that if something is wrong with their workplace, such as safety or wages, that they can speak up so that they don't die in their workplace. They continue to take care of their families, continue to work in these cities. That's all I have to say. We have an opportunity to help people. Let's help people and not hurt people. Thank you. Kenneth, I think it's Wolfbrook. Please correct me um when you get up here and introduce yourself. You'll have three minutes, sir. It's uh Kenneth West Morland. The handwriting is just very scratchy.

Yeah, I wouldn't have ever ever gotten that.

I'm obviously here to speak against Flock. There would be nothing else reasonable here to speak against. The only reason I would speak for Flock is if I was some paid bozo sitting in the back who's employed by Flock and therefore wants to speak in favor of Flock. Um I just want to talk about a few specific things at the start. Um and this is regarding the way in which um flock shares data between police departments. So when someone from another police department maybe a thousand miles away, the person doesn't even need to be a police officer. They just have to have a police department login. They have to get into the system somehow. We know that people are getting into the system in all kinds of ways. Um Dunwilly does not get access to see the plate that was searched or the officer who made the search. Many flock searches only give reason investigate. So you have no reason why you have no understanding of why people are getting into your system and using your information or whatever to to search what's going on. Here on the audit logging and oversight the mitigations PowerPoint slate three says Flock quote Flock has agreed to consider adding real-time alerting on potential misuse um or unquote on potential misuse. Recently Flock has done the exact opposite of this. Now, if an operator types a prohibited search reason, for example, I want to stalk my ex. Flock now deletes this query as shown on their website, which means, you know, you can start with something absolutely ridiculous and then you can get your query to exactly what it is that you need to be. And you guys have no idea what it is that this person who's searching is actually searching for. But on a broader scale, you know, there there seems to be a lot of confusion up here, definitely not back here, about how exactly this system works. you know that how is it why is it that an agency a thousand miles away needs to log into the system here. The principle is pretty obvious, right? It's if I film everything happening everywhere across the country all the time, then I'm guaranteed to have footage of something, you know, like that's obviously the point. That's what's happening. That

there's just some kind of mass surveillance aspect going on. Um, and just a a final point, it's absolutely ridiculous to allow these paid buffoons who clearly don't know what they're talking about and who are lying to you guys to come up here and talk as experts when the people who actually know what they're talking about, who are in the audience and who came up to public comments and who have real evidence behind what they're saying, can give you the real answers. Literally, what you're saying, and we can all hear it, is that we want to be lied to. We want to be lied to so that we can make a corrupt decision against the interests of our constituents, right? And when the people who have the actual information that you guys want try and speak up, you call them children. How derogatory. I mean, how how abhorent and how embarrassing for the city of Dunworthy that their city council is calling the people who want to give them the actual information they need children because they want to make uninformed, corrupt decisions in their own self-imposed ignorance. Ben Jordan, approach the microphone, sir, and you'll have three minutes. It's a hard act to follow. I'm one of the children, I think. Um, so look, I I'm going to be I'll be honest with you. Uh, nobody expects the city council to have a 360 degree understanding of encryption or side channel attacks on on cameras that send data using LTE signals and what whatnot. Um, I'm sitting over here fidgeting while y'all don't really know what questions to ask and while your surveillance vendor keeps changing the definitions of data and security breach. And just so we can all be completely clear on this, as a hacker myself with an exhaustive technical

familiarity with Fox Safety's hardware and and their their system, uh you know that this security matrix thing is nonsense, right? Like it's a performative graphic to fool the public into thinking that you're taking taxpayer concerns seriously. And I say this again just looking through these things and I can contradict so many of them off the top of my head and I don't want to be a jerk but I'm sitting here doing that and and I I had a copy of it before this I was doing it then. Um so trying to explain my frustration right now. I spent an afternoon the other week in your real time crime center which is impressive and I pointed out vulnerabilities just within the video streams that were running in Chrome. Jason over here has worked tirelessly trying to put a simple meeting together between me and this council or anybody with this technical uh knowledge about Fox safety in this council and do you not have a single question for me throughout this entire thing? I'm I'm watching you ask questions of people who can't answer them. I I'm I'm I'm budging trying to ask your your attorney to clarify what where the training data is being shared to. what what open source model did they initially use and are they contributing back to that model? Like very pertinent questions when it comes to the data of your civilians. Um why is this such a challenge? I I know some of you have heard that I secretly work for a Flock competitor. That's absolutely false. My attorneys would love for Flock to say this in any official capacity. Um, again, just to give you some credentials, I I work with cities and police departments all over the country. I'm giving a lecture at Georgia Tech next month about this very thing. I consult with members of Congress and Homeland Security. If you can give me more than three minutes, not in a public setting, it could be in a a more private one, I'm more than happy to show you exactly what needs to be updated, secured, and remediated. So, I

ask you, what will happen? What are we scared of if you had an independent uh security audit process? I'm I'm literally kind of confused by this. Like what on earth is the consequence to making an educated decision and taking your time with this? And did I just hear your attorney say that you're working on a way to respond better to a security breach?

Thank you. Jason. All right. First, I want to say that you shouldn't be coming here and disrupting the process. That's just antithetical to what we're trying to accomplish here. Um, and I just want to have an educated discussion with you guys. Um, first, uh, I'll I'll quote Senator Ron Weiden, who's on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He's much more qualified than I I am to talk about this topic. Um, I'll start the quote. Flockers received vast sums of taxpayer money to build a national national surveillance network, but Flock's cavalier attitude to attitude towards cyber security needlessly exposes Americans to the threat of hackers and foreign spies tapping this data. Accordingly, we urge the FTC to hold Flock accountable for its negligent cyber security practices." End quote. Now, I'll go into some of their claims versus uh let's just say the truth. Flock claims it has no access to personally identical information like names, address, or DMV records. Yet on January 23rd, 2025, Dunwy sent Lucid Techch, a company that it had no contract with and then was acquired by Flock, a file containing citizens full name, race, sex, age, driver's license numbers, phone numbers, home addresses, and medical information from 911 calls. That sure sounds like access to me. Um, on the claim that all of their access is for product improvement, I would like to point to some specific searches I'd be happy to share from their vice president of business development. One, yellow race car with black stripes. Two, potato chip van. Potato was misspelled, by the way. Three, unicycle. Fourth, maybe my personal favorite, rocket car. Um, if you would like to ask Flock how those are used for law enforcement purposes or

to improve the product, I would greatly appreciate that. Um, another claim, Flock claims it permanently deletes ALPR data. Notice that they say ALPR data specifically, not the meta metadata and AI training data derived from it, which lives in systems with no traceability. Um, Flock claims customers own 100% of their data and it's never sold. But the police department's own PowerPoint state that states that Flock has become the go-to product due in part to its data sharing model. Every time Flock adds a customer and convinces us to share access, our citizens data is the value that's being exchanged. We are the product. Um, delete and do not use were mentioned as inactive organizations. Every single other inactive organization I've seen seen in Flock has just had its name and then inactive in brackets. I can show you this. I do not think that's an adequate explanation. Um, lastly, I'll share this search from the Sandy Springs Police Department. aggravated assault suspect vehicle. Find own probable cause. Stop and ID all occupants. Contact Detective Lopez at kevin Kevin Lopez done.gov or his phone number if stopped. And that brings up the fundamental issue for flock. If people aren't being tracked, then you could never pull someone over due to flock. Why? Because cars do not commit crimes. People commit crimes. So, you have to link them somehow. That's the rest of it. Thank you. Jacob Hart, are you still here? Yes, sir. You will have three minutes. Is this your I just for helping the clerk. Is this your second time? Okay. Thank you.

Hi, Jacob. Um, yes, I don't have the uh technical prowess of those who have spoken before me. Um but and I was not I did not speak before but the presentation prompted the question for me about the uh block OS 911 or whatever that is uh effectively cutting out the middleman of um their service or like a from the caller to the dispatcher um by using the flock data. And so my thought is that if they if black has been proven to have uh roughly 40% um 40% uh like mis uh misrepresented whatever uh calls uh that is then taking 40% of the cops to call like calls that are not accurate. Um, so that's effectively, you know, allocating your police officers to, uh, unprompted leads, you know. Um, but, uh, I don't know. I guess the thing the thing for me is that uh you know yeah as as we're talking about also being a little done woody uh is that we are you know it would be one thing if we were talking about this if this were a novel issue but there are multiple lawsuits that other cities have filed um and multiple lawsuits in other states that have gone through and where Flock has blatantly lied to you in the same exact form and they have done this charade multiple times and this is there's evidence to back that this is not new and I'm trying to plead with you as a you know concerned citizen that like they um they're pulling a charade and there is there are a number of people that are impassionate about this who care about our safety and who are saying that flock is just they're misrepresenting everything that they're

saying they're outright lying and they're pulling you know they're pulling one over on you in front of your face. And so, you know, it makes me think of uh this um I want to adapt uh this Einstein quote about uh receiving critique is that if the critique were sufficient, you wouldn't need a hund like you wouldn't need seven people at one point clamoring over each other to try to get a point across when they're all being uh confused about what they're saying. And um it just it reeks of illegitimacy. it reeks of of not being aware of what they're doing and they are trying, you know, they have financial and private interests in getting this and getting these contracts. They are not interested in your your city. You know, if they were, they would respond to they would respond to all of the lawsuits in a, you know, actual way and they would adapt, but they're just telling you what you want to hear, you know, and so this is not, you know, and like I don't know. I mean, forgive us for being Thank you,

Andy. I think it's Broward, but the last one I got so wrong. Uh, you'll have three minutes uh when you get to the microphone. And hello, I'm Andy Bard. Um, I think we can agree the job of public servants is to represent the interests of your constituency. Here we are and uh we're telling you that working with Flock does the exact opposite. And I'm stunned by the willingness to rely on information uh to understand the risk associated with using flock coming from individuals with the highest level of conflict of interest and the contempt that has been expressed when the constituents who will be affected by this decision expressed and tried to point out the uh inconsistencies and mischaracterizations. Um, the Flock representative admitted that data from a local camera was found on the dark web. And aside from being pedantic, you can only characterize that statement one way. It's a lie. Um, he claimed the data that was contractually stipulated to be used for training purposes would be anonymized by stripping it of its metadata. But there's an issue with this. It's not possible to anonymize data whose sole purpose is to identify the subject. it. The vulnerabilities which he denied, deflected, and mischaracterized assume that the only threats to your constituents come from outside bad actors gaining unauthorized access to the data. But there are numerous documented cases of authorized users of flock misusing this data to stalk, harass, and abuse private citizens, including in the state of Georgia, a law enforcement officer. Uh in these instances, Flock did not just fail to prevent a crime, it actually enabled crime. And by soliciting the services of

this company, you each of you is complicit in this. Uh the very nature of this system and its functionality which depends on the wide sharing of the data it collects creates thousands of points of telemetry each of which are vulnerable to breach and misuse from users authorized and unauthorized alike. Your constituents are not guinea pigs for tech corporations and public awareness of data collection and mishandling is on the rise and your constituents will not take kindly to being sold out to tech corporations. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Joe Hersh. Y'all have asked a lot of questions, but uh one of the things I brought up at the beginning was that I had heard that a police officer was recently reprimanded or disciplined for for within the city of misusing flock very recently. John, I saw you look towards our city manager and attorney and you looked interested, but you didn't speak up. No one said anything. No one seems to want to know if that's true or what happened or did you not want to publicize that a Dunway police officer perhaps just looked at uh records himself illegally? That that's not something you want to you're just about PR and you don't want the city to look bad. Is that is that the problem? Like why do you keep your mouth shut when you should open it? Seriously, it doesn't make any sense. And to to carry on where others are saying, you are giving so much credence and airtime to people who have invested a uh financial interest in flock being approved. Not what the people here say. And then the mayor is not here right now, but she was the one who made a point to demean, well, these people in these audience, they're not from here. Who the hell cares? If their cars are tracked, doesn't that apply to us? What a rude comment. Yeah, she said it. And for those of you that were upset with the decorum in here, look at yourselves. You're giving the bad apples in the city the air time. You're giving airtime to Ginger Leage, who you know was part of a cover up of hiding text messages that belong to the public. Why do you listen to her? She's not trustworthy. And our city manager, look at him. He was so upset that people were going to read what was on his phone, which was public records. He ditched his phone in

defiance of two anti- item notices and an open records request because he didn't want his information shared to the public. But here he is promoting our information being shared. What a croc. You where's where's your phone that you turned in? Supposedly never heard from him. You will not even give airtime or meetings with people who have more information than Ginger who was squirming up here because she didn't know the answers. She were giving time to an attorney who's like, "Yeah, we're going to work on that. We're going to work on that." Why didn't that take care of before this meeting? How irresponsible for y'all to act like, "Oh, we'll take care of it later. Don't worry." No, this was the time. Why couldn't that be handled? What's the matter with y'all? Seriously, you're giving airtime to fools and not listening to those that have knowledge. And you want to say, "Oh, well, we're just protecting the public." BS. Look at yourselves. I need you to hold up a mirror to yourselves and look at yourselves and realize that you're not protecting the public. You're just trying to keep the PR for the city going well. That's not how you should run a city. Do better, all of you. And I'm looking at you, too, John. I'm sorry. Are we on now? Okay. Next speaker is Rad Keslanski. You have up to three minutes.

Yes. Hello. I spoke with up here before at a previous meeting uh trying to stress that there were these significant uh security concerns. None of that was addressed in what I in what I heard in what I could only call a terrible sales pitch. I I I mean I have literally put put together pitch decks for hackathons that had more thought put put into that and had more substance put into that. I heard a lot of promises. I heard a lot of they're supposed to do this. I heard a lot of, oh, this is, you know, we're going to make we're going to use this color-coded system and then we're just going to ignore it entirely because it doesn't act it doesn't actually make it look as look as good as what we have here. I did not see anything that actually addressed the safety and security. I did not see anything that addressed the breaches and vulnerabilities that these gentlemen have uh shown on their YouTube channels that clearly exist in the system. Whether or not Flock wants to claim that, oh, it wasn't our systems that were actually hacked or oh, these were just misconfigured cameras is completely beside the point. They're getting paid for these misconfigured cameras. If they're not willing to stand behind their pro stand behind their product, that means that they're going to leave you holding the bag when something actually happens with that system. And that's on y'all. Like, you know, I you know, I know this urge that you h that you have. You want to you have the you have this set up on your system. You want to go along with it. you want to just set it up, knock it down, listen to the listen to the sales pitch and get it and get it off of your plate. That that can't be done here. This is something that needs to be taken

seriously. And if the salespeople that are trying to convince you of this don't even have the sense to you know lie to you properly or then you know that's that system those bugs those vulnerabilities that's all still there that hasn't been addressed that needs to be addressed if you're going to use this use this system if you're going to have this data sharing going on and if you're going to have, you know, taxpayer dollars from my property taxes, my parents' property taxes, anybody else's sales taxes that are, you know, all these people that come here, even if they're not locals. There are certain there are certainly people that contribute to the you to the city and, you know, are going to have the these opinions like do the due diligence, please leave this Thank you. Our next speaker is Sean Collins. You'll have up to three minutes. Is Sean Collins still here?

I thought y'all skipped over me. Sean Collins, I'm back. All right. Uh, I'll keep it quick. You know, y'all asked a lot of questions tonight. You know, thanks again for asking questions. you asked questions like a month ago, too. The one thing I don't hear, though, is what are flock alternatives? Like, y'all are literally doing backflips for this company. You're going through legal. You're doing audits. You've pushed the stuff multiple times. You're expanding tests. You're doing all these back flips for this [ __ ] company that does nothing for you when the like simpler technology already exists. All those automatic triggers that the chief and everyone wants to talk about can be done with nonAI enabled license plate readers. So why are we spending so much money and time and effort dumping into flock specifically when if y'all want to do this just find some alternatives, man. Like everyone has come up here complaining and saying how bad they are repeatedly and we're always back to square one. like we feel like we're just arguing and getting nowhere because it's always ah well we'll push it and we'll we'll make another we'll make another like deal with them but the whole time you're waiting to do the deals cameras are out there running collecting data doing whatever they want. So like you're just spinning your wheels. Ask about alternatives. Figure stuff out. Data privacy, you know, it it's not about the whole, oh, if I have nothing to hide, I shouldn't be worried idea. Data privacy is about being in control of your own data, your own self. I don't I don't get to opt in to being tracked or my license plate being tracked. I'm not I'm not a criminal. I work from home. I don't do anything. I just hang out. But I don't want to get tracked. Guy with tattoos tagged just for walking

down the street, just for going for a jog. And now someone in New York can sit there and search guy with tattoos. And now I pop up. Hey, what we doing? What are we doing? Anyway, have a good

Anna Menddees. Uh, approach the microphone and introduce yourself please and you'll because I probably didn't say your name right and you'll have three minutes.

Hi, I'm Anna Mendes. Um, I'm an essential worker who has lived and worked in Dunwi. Um, based on my experience, I don't believe that block safety is will keep our community safer and I've heard that from many council members, including U. Miss Lynn. So, I would like to ask some questions around surrounding safety. Um, if Lock is protecting our safety and our privacy, why are they actively involved in six lawsuits around the country right now regarding um legal and privacy concerns? If flock is keeping us safe, then why did Pedmont, California spent $500,000 only to find that 99.7% of plates led to no solving of crimes? If lock is keeping us safe, why did the city of Oak Park, Illinois, find 40% false positive rates, significant racial profiling, and cops pulling falsely accusing family members of crimes, pulling them into hot parking lots, pointing guns at their faces, traumatizing their families and children's in the name of solving a crime that didn't exist. And lastly, in my own personal experience, on my commute to work in Dunwy, experiencing street harassment on my way to work because the city of Dunwy would prefer to spend millions on these cameras instead of investing in bigger sidewalks in in street lamps instead of investing in programs like um that counter counter violence because I'm a beautiful trans woman and I'm going to be harassed. But the city of Dunoody would rather invest millions of dollars in these cameras be and and for me to get harassed on the way to work. Cameras don't keep people safe. There is actually plenty of research that many of your constituents have

alluded to and that I have just alluded to that proves this. And you can either face this or ignore it and be lied to by these companies. And like the examples that I just named, better street lighting, community violence intervention programs help reduce crimes way more than these cameras have proven have been able to prove in their existence. Thank you.

Thank you. That concludes the cards I have and so therefore public comment is concluded. Uh, Eric, do you have uh comments? Yes, we need an executive session for legal and real estate. Thank you. Uh, any council comments? Wait, wait. Okay, come on up and tell me your name. Wait. Oh, I did. Miss, I saw your card. Hold on. come on up and um be one second because I got up to go to the restroom and I might have Thank you.

Uh if you'll just speak and maybe fill out a card when you if I can't find it. Go ahead. You have three minutes. I saw your card. I found it. Sorry. Thank you.

Um I've heard y'all comment a few times on the behavior of the crowd and liken them to children. I used to be a preschool teacher and when I had a rowdy classroom, scolding, reprimanding didn't work. What worked was looking at what was happening and saying, "What's underlying this behavior and how can we work on that?" What's underlying the behavior in here is that people are trying to alert you to the danger that you're facing, to the fact that you're being lied to. When the flock representative was on the screen, one of the questions was, "Why did you change the terms and conditions to say that you can sell our data?" His answer was, "We change the terms and conditions all the time." That is not an answer. And that is a justification for the outrage that you saw in this room tonight. I feel incredibly grateful to all the people who have brought this to your attention and that are here. And I feel grateful that you're reconsidering your relationship with Flock. There's 30 city actually I think there's 50 somewhere between 30 and 50 cities nationwide that have canceled their contracts with Flock. and I urge you to get in contact with them, talk to them, and consider doing the same. Uh, these include Flagstaff, Arizona, Hillsboro, North Carolina, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Despite its name, Flock Safety does not make me feel safer. What makes me feel safe is actual community building and access for people to housing, food, sidewalks, public transportation, healthcare, clean water, clean air. Not living in a world where my every move is tracked, analyzed by an artificial intelligence, and then stored in a database. The argument that flock helps solve more crimes is a weak one, and it's a slippery slope. There's lots of things that would theoretically help solve more crimes. If you said everyone in Dunwhati has to have a camera inside their home at all times. If you said the police no longer need search warrants, that would help solve more crimes, but we recognize that that transgresses too far on our rights as citizens. This is a similar

issue. Technology is inherently neutral, but it's the people that use it and the regulations that are put in place that determine what effect it has on the world. And there are there seem to be no regulations around the use of flock. Um I'm thinking of Facebook also. You know, Facebook started out as a company that was like you can share your photos, plan parties with friends, connect with people you used to know, and now 15 years later, it's responsible for huge mental health crisis. It's responsible for misinformation wars and it's responsible for polarization and division. That's not where they started. But companies, especially tech companies, follow the dollar. They do not follow the wishes of their communities. Um, this also comes as a time where we're watching the rise of authoritarianism in the United States, which makes the expansion of flock all the more concerning because this is a federal network of campus. Thank you. Thank you. uh council comments. So,

all right. Thanks for the dumb money folks. Uh as you know, my passion about sustainability and being able to ride or walk around city and this Sunday night uh Sunday afternoon at 1:45, come on and join us out at Brook Run Park uh for a free slice of pizza, Piccolo Pizza. We're going to celebrate at least the second neighborhood connection now that we're opening up. We're building out our our multi-use path network. So, we're going to have a police escorted ride. It's 2.27 miles each way. Uh free slice of pizza at Piccolo, meet at 1:45 p.m. Um if you go to the city's website at the calendar, you'll see that. Um it's the second neighborhood connection. We actually did one about a decade ago at the end of Oldtown Spring Old Springhouse Lane. We built a a bridge across a creek and we connected this neighborhood to the next community that was building out there. So, um, we're continuing to expand that. We're going to have a ribbon cutting because we're opening up this other neighborhood connection as well. So, come out and join us. It'll be from some fun, familyfriendly, uh, good for all kids. Thank you.

Else. All right. I need a motion to adjourn to executive session for real estate and legal. So moved. Moved by Stacy. Second. Second by Rob. Um, all in favor say I. I be back.

driving by. It's hard to look though. So, where where then where do we at? I know. We don't want to end. I'll tell you where we're going.

So, waiting for me upstairs. She's not coming down. So I just I'm move to adjurnn by Stacy, second by Katherine. All in favor of journment say I. I. I. Mean journ. Thank you.