Members of Council,
Since I was denied the opportunity to make public comment at today's meeting of the Environment and Safety Committee, I want to share my comments via email:
My name is Patrick Conant and I’m a resident of East-West Asheville.
I’d like to speak on Item 6, the Interlocal Agreement for Fusus.
I appreciate Councilmember Ullman’s questions and offer to allow the public to learn more about this system.
This is a new program and new technology, and while I can see how this could be another tool to address public safety concerns, a wide-reaching government surveillance program understandably introduces important questions as well.
I’d like to speak on Item 6, the Interlocal Agreement for Fusus.
I appreciate Councilmember Ullman’s questions and offer to allow the public to learn more about this system.
This is a new program and new technology, and while I can see how this could be another tool to address public safety concerns, a wide-reaching government surveillance program understandably introduces important questions as well.
I fear that this item is moving forward without adequate space for public input, and I don't feel that today's discussion provided sufficient answers to many important questions.
My main concern is there was a lot of information "referenced" in the Staff report and today’s discussion, but little that the public can actually see.
Specifically, Council is authorizing the City Manager to enter into an interlocal agreement - yet the full text of the proposed agreement is not included with the meeting materials for either this Committee meeting or tonight's Council meeting.
At today's meeting, there was discussion of BCSO policies that govern use of this system and who has access. Where can the public find these policies?
There was also mention of an audit process, which I agree is an important safeguard. I encourage Council to use this audit process as a tool for accountability and to require transparency of this information - the public and Council should receive regular reports regarding how and how often this system is utilized.
Finally, there was mention of a governance group overseeing the implementation and use of this system. This is another important safeguard, and I’d like to know more about this membership and function of this body. City Staff mentioned that the Chief of Police (or his designee) would be a member, but who else is involved?
Specifically, Council is authorizing the City Manager to enter into an interlocal agreement - yet the full text of the proposed agreement is not included with the meeting materials for either this Committee meeting or tonight's Council meeting.
At today's meeting, there was discussion of BCSO policies that govern use of this system and who has access. Where can the public find these policies?
There was also mention of an audit process, which I agree is an important safeguard. I encourage Council to use this audit process as a tool for accountability and to require transparency of this information - the public and Council should receive regular reports regarding how and how often this system is utilized.
Finally, there was mention of a governance group overseeing the implementation and use of this system. This is another important safeguard, and I’d like to know more about this membership and function of this body. City Staff mentioned that the Chief of Police (or his designee) would be a member, but who else is involved?
For this governance group to provide true oversight, it seems critical to me that the group should include representation of City Staff outside APD, as well as members of the public.
I also found it misleading and concerning that Sherriff Quenting Miller was listed on the published agenda as presenting this item with Ben Woody, yet nobody from BSCO or APD was involved in the discussion or question and answer period related to this item.
I encourage Council to take additional time with this item, and to require Staff to provide additional information to Council and the public prior to approving this interlocal agreement.
Furthermore, regarding process, Councilmember Ullman indicated that she would pull this item off tonight's consent agenda. I want to express my concerns with the way our city Council has been utilizing the consent agenda over the past year.
When Council places items on the consent agenda, knowing they’ll get pulled off during the meeting, it introduces new barriers to access and participation for members of the public. This maneuver sends a confusing message regarding the status of these items and limits opportunities for public comment.
I also believe the increasingly common nature of this practice undermines the intent and purpose of the consent agenda as a procedural tool.
I encourage Council members to develop a better process in setting your agendas so that the published agenda provides a clear and accurate representation of the business to be discussed.
As always, thank you all for your service to our City.
Patrick Conant