BRIAN HOFER

Brian@Secure-Justice.org

Chair and Executive Director

Chair, City of Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission (2016-Present)

Chair, Domain Awareness Center Ad Hoc Privacy Committee (2014-2015)

In January 2014, Brian Hofer became aware that an Orwellian sounding $11 million-dollar city-wide surveillance system called the Domain Awareness Center was being planned for Oakland. Intended to aggregate data inputs from facial recognition software, 700 cameras, automated license plate readers, and ShotSpotter, Brian walked inside Oakland’s City Hall for the first time, to see if he could help oppose the project. Three months later on March 4, 2014, and in response to overwhelming community opposition to the planned project, the Oakland City Council voted to dramatically scale back the project, removed the surveillance equipment from the remaining portion, and created an ad hoc committee of citizens to start drafting privacy policies for the city. Brian was appointed to and eventually chaired this committee.

In the few years since the Domain Awareness Center discussion, Brian successfully fought for a permanent committee tasked with oversight of surveillance equipment; successfully introduced ordinances throughout the greater Bay Area at both the county and city level to implement significant surveillance equipment reforms, advised on and advocated for state legislation impacting the right to privacy and surveillance oversight, and coordinated with and advised groups around the country on how to implement reforms through legislation and policy writing. Brian is presently consulting with various cities across the country regarding citizen oversight and participation pertaining to surveillance equipment and data sharing, Smart City regulations, and various “sanctuary” supporting legislative projects.

Brian has presented on his work at conferences sponsored by:

California Department of Justice: Protecting our Communities, Respecting our Liberties
RightsCon: Silicon Valley
Left Forum: The Rise of Big Surveillance – How Oakland pushed back and won
The Eleventh HOPE Conference
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers: Predicting Policing
Berkeley Law School: Policy, Politics and Problem Solving
Berkeley Law School Information Privacy Law Association: What are Stingrays?
NYU Law School: Privacy Localism
NYU Law School: Policing Project
NYU Law School: Policing, Race and Technology
Georgetown Law School: Color of Surveillance
Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy Race & Policy Symposium
Cleveland-Marshall School of Law - Smart Cities, Surveillance and Privacy
The Atlantic: CityLab DC/Bloomberg, Aspen
Library Freedom Project/Noisebridge: Digital Rights in Libraries
Brennan Center: Policing Race and Technology
MetroLab Network: Trust in the Public Realm
University of Miami Law School - The future of facial recognition technology in law enforcement
Santa Clara County Data Privacy Day - Modern contact tracing for future pandemics & privacy
WKAR - Coded Bias
Testified before various California state Senate and Assembly committees in support of privacy and sanctuary enhancing legislation

Listed below are some of the more noteworthy projects Brian has worked on.

2015

Resolution establishing a cell-site simulator use policy with the first annual report in the nation, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Alameda County); co-author

2016

Ordinance establishing the first citizen’s municipal privacy commission in the nation with oversight of surveillance equipment and its use, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of surveillance equipment, based on ACLU model, first entity in the nation, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Santa Clara County); advocated for

2017

Resolution terminating existing MOU with Homeland Security Investigations, an arm of Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE), adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); author

Ordinance establishing greater transparency and stricter standards when Oakland Police participate in a federal joint task force, such as the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task force (JTTF), adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

2018

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of surveillance equipment, based on ACLU model, first city in the nation, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Berkeley); co-author

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of surveillance equipment, based on ACLU model, second city in the nation, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Davis); co-author

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of surveillance equipment, based on ACLU model, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

Ordinance establishing a policy that vendors that supply data or extreme vetting services to ICE are ineligible for municipal contracts, first entity in the nation, adopted by 6-1 vote (Richmond); author

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of surveillance equipment, based on ACLU model, first transit district in the nation, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Bay Area Rapid Transit/BART); co-author

2019

Ordinance establishing a true Sanctuary City, first in the nation, which prohibits city employees from proactively assisting ICE, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

Ordinance establishing a policy that vendors that supply data or extreme vetting services to ICE are ineligible for municipal contracts, second entity in the nation, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Berkeley); author

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of surveillance equipment, based on ACLU model, first city in the country to prohibit City’s use of facial surveillance technology (San Francisco); co-author

Ordinance establishing a policy that vendors that supply data, extreme vetting, or detention facility services to ICE, CBP, or ORR are ineligible for municipal contracts, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); author

Ordinance amendment to prohibit the City’s use of facial surveillance technology, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

Ordinance amendment to prohibit the City’s use of facial surveillance technology, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Berkeley); co-author

2020

Ordinance amendments to prohibit the City’s use of biometric surveillance technology and predictive policing analytics, first in the country to do so, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

2021

Ordinance establishing a vetting framework for potential acquisition and use of military equipment used by police department, second city in the country to do so, adopted by unanimous Yes vote (Oakland); co-author

Successfully sued the City of Berkeley for violating its sanctuary contracting ordinance, when they failed to provide the mandated annual report demonstrating compliance with the ordinance. Secure Justice forced the city to cure and perform, and recovered its attorneys fees and court costs.

2023

Successfully sued the City of Berkeley for violating its surveillance technology ordinance, when they claimed that certain technology was categorically exempt from oversight. Secure Justice forced the City to cure and perform, and recovered its attorneys fees and court costs.

Successfully sued the City of Oakland for violating its surveillance technology ordinance, multiple surveillance technology use policies, and various state laws (RIPA, SB 34, PRA). Secure Justice forced the city to cure and perform, and recovered its attorneys fees and court costs.

Additional Projects (expert testimony, consulting)

2022 San Diego, CA - consulted with community groups and Council Member Montgomery Steppe’s office on an Oakland-inspired surveillance ordinance/privacy commission combined proposal - unanimously approved by the City Council.

2020 Portland, OR - consulted with the City of Portland/SmartCityPDX, and testified in support of two ordinances prohibiting the city’s use of facial recognition technology, and private businesses from doing the same in a space of public accommodations.

Awards/Profiles

Defending Rights and Dissent – Patriot Award (March 2016) https://rightsanddissent.org/news/oakland-privacy-activist-brian-hofer-receives-march-2016-patriot-award/

East Bay Express Best of the East Bay – Defender of a Free Society (August 2016) https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/defender-of-a-free-society-brian-hofer/Content?oid=4932846

Oakland Magazine – Brian Hofer Thwarts Authoritarian Power (August 2018) http://www.oaklandmagazine.com/August-2018/Brian-Hofer-Thwarts-Authoritarian-Power/

New York Times – The Man Behind The Ban (May 2019) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/15/technology/facial-recognition-san-francisco-ban.html

Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Pioneer Award (September 2019) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/09/effs-2019-pioneer-awards-winner-remarks-and-speeches