By Arturo Castanares
Editor-at-Large
A new lawsuit claims the City of San Diego is violating its own policy aimed at protecting the public from over-reaching surveillance equipment deployed by police without proper approval or transparency.
Three privacy advocates -Lilly Irani, Seth Hall, and Mat Wahlstrom- filed suit after the San Diego Police Department used surveillance systems at the Same Diego Pride Parade and Comic-Con without disclosing their use locations as required by law.
The lawsuit also claims SDPD improperly invoked an exemption for “exigent circumstances” without demonstrating an imminent or emergency threat, as mandated by the City’s TRUST ordinance.
The San Diego City Council passed the Transparent and Responsible Use of Surveillance Technology (“TRUST”) Ordinance in August 2022 that requires disclosure of surveillance equipment obtained by the police as well as listing the locations throughout City Council districts where the technology is deployed.
“The TRUST Ordinance was enacted to protect the public’s right to privacy and ensure accountability in the use of surveillance technologies,” said Geneviéve Jones-Wright, Executive Director of Community Advocates for Just and Moral Governance (MoGo) and one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs. “By failing to follow their legal requirements, the City of San Diego has not only violated the ordinance but also eroded public trust. This lawsuit seeks to hold the City accountable and to ensure that these protections are upheld for all San Diegans.”
Geneviéve Jones-Wright
The lawsuit asks the court to enforce full compliance with the TRUST Ordinance, including suspending the City’s use of the surveillance technologies until the required procedures are followed.
“Transparency and public oversight are non-negotiable when it comes to surveillance technology,” said Cory J. Briggs, of Briggs Law, one of the group's attorneys. “This lawsuit is about ensuring that the City respects the law and the privacy rights of its residents.”
The surveillance technology includes street light cameras and police drones which have been the subject of residents' concerns since 2017.
The City Council first approved a $30.2 million program to retrofit 14,000 street lights to LED units, but the program also included 3,200 surveillance camera and microphone units that were discreetly referred to as “sensor nodes.” The project was described at the time as the world’s largest smart city Internet of Things (IoT) sensor platform.
La Prensa San Diego reported on July 27, 2017, that the staff presentation to the City Council did not mention the inclusion of cameras within the system, and after the vote, four City Council offices told La Prensa San Diego that they were not presented information about the cameras during staff briefings before the vote.
The official resolution presented to the City Council for approval, prepared by the City Attorney’s Office, did not refer to cameras or sensor nodes.
Although the City and SDPD initially denied that cameras were being used, exposure of the police use of surveillance technology raised concerns from residents which led the to the program being suspended in 2020.
After the program was suspended, SDPD admitted that the system was used in at least 400 investigated cases between August 2018 and September 2020.
SDPD also used surveillance technology that was obtained through grants funded by the Urban Area Working Group (UAWG), a group that includes every police agency in the County which met in secret for since 2005.
The UAWG committee distributed over $260 million in federal funds to purchase surveillance and military-grade equipment, including armored personnel vehicles, drones, and riot gear without any public oversight or reports back to their respective elected leaders.
In December 2020, La Prensa San Diego filed a lawsuit challenging UAWG’s secret meetings as a violation of the state’s Brown Act open meeting laws.
As a result of the lawsuit, the UAWG board amended its charter to require that they hold open public meetings, and the group began providing access at its March 25, 2021 meeting.
The court later ruled that the committee had violated the Brown Act and required the group to continue to open its meetings to the public.
In September 2021, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 481 that regulates how law enforcement agencies can use, purchase, and disclose information about military equipment at their disposal.
Just two months ago, California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office issued Information Bulletin 2024-DLE-13 to advise police agencies how to comply with the provisions of AB481.
The bulletin clarified that the law requires (1) law enforcement agencies and state agencies to prepare and publish “military equipment” use policies, (2) to prepare and publish annual “military equipment” reports, and (3) governing bodies of law enforcement agencies to follow specified procedures related to approval of such use policies and annual reports.
The Attorney General’s guidance came a month after media reports exposed the San Francisco Police Department’s use of drones after they knowingly violated AB481.
SFPD asked their Board of Supervisors to approve the drones after the police ignored warnings from within its ranks that it should have held off purchasing the equipment until they received approvals.
Attorney Cory Briggs has represented La Prensa San Diego in several successful cases involving public agencies’ violations of the California Public Records Act (CPRA) and the Brown Act.
