SR-04-21-2018-4A
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: April 21, 2018
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 8
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Katie Lichtig, Assistant City Manager, City Manager's Office, Administration
Subject: 2018 Council Retreat: 21st Century Government, Council’s Five Strategic
Goals, and the Performance Management Framework
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the updates, discuss and provide
direction to staff on next steps to effectively pursue a 21st Century Government and
implement the citywide performance Framework adopted in last year’s Budget.
“Cities that think ahead, stay ahead.”
Background
Among the powers vested in the City Council is the responsibility to provide
overall policy direction to the City government. This responsibility extends beyond
making decisions on individual agenda items and approving the City's budget. It
involves setting an overall focus on what matters most -- both in delivering consistent,
high-quality results as well as shaping an organizational structure, culture and capacity
to achieve those goals.
Over the decades, Santa Monica has gone over and above the essential
protection of "health, safety and welfare" that is the core legal requirement of all
California municipalities. In fact, in 2003, the City Council adopted an overall set of
measures developed after broad community input to “enhance our resources, prevent
harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic
well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations.” This
became the basis for a regular Sustainability Report Card. Similarly, in 2013, the City
undertook a pioneering effort to identify the key indicators of Community Wellbeing, to
2 of 8
create a “guide for making more informed decisions, more efficient use of resources,
and improve the quality of life of people throughout the community." In 2015, the City
Council unanimously adopted five Strategic Goals as “game-changing” efforts to create
a new model of mobility; exert regional leadership on homelessness; reclaim local
control of the Santa Monica Airport; maintain a diverse and inclusive community; and
promote wellbeing so that residents Learn & Thrive. Finally, last year, the City Council
incorporated into the 2017-19 Biannual Budget a Framework that integrates our delivery
of City services and Strategic Goals with the larger outcomes that support a sustainable
city of wellbeing.
Introduction
Even as our city has been at the forefront of pursuing broad and visionary goals
to improve the quality of life and standard of living of community members, like other
California cities, Santa Monica has retained much of the structure and processes
inherited from a City Charter adopted in 1947 and traditional government practices that
are considerably older. This contributes to increasing tension between public
expectations and the capacity of local government to address them in the 21st Century.
From the way we consume our news to power our vehicles, technological
innovation is disrupting every industry and sector—the public sector is no exception.
The rapid acceleration of change has, at times, bred economic displacement and
inequitable growth. Skeptical of governments’ ability to solve these problems, some
people in this country and elsewhere have become frustrated and angry -- and many
are nostalgic to return to the stability and comfort of some version of the remembered
past.
Here in California, as once reliable windows of social and economic opportunities
have closed, our population has burgeoned in size and diversity. According to a 2012
Stanford Center for Longevity study, while California’s population increased by 10%,
Hispanic and Asian populations each grew by about 30%. Though California’s boom
economy has supported this growth, vibrancy has forced housing prices to rise; in just
the past year, the median home value in Santa Monica has risen 8.4%. While an
3 of 8
affordability crisis rages, the State’s pension liabilities are mounting and now far
outweigh our ability to fund them without considering painful trade-offs. At the regional
and local levels, we are assuming a new metropolitan identity, moving beyond the old
hallmarks of the California Dream (a single-family home, an expansive lawn, a car).
Local media outlets have gone digital. In the face of these challenges and changes,
community members are no longer accepting of slow-moving and methodical
government processes and procedures. Residents increasingly base their expectations
of government on private consumer experiences—they demand solutions, and they
expect them now.
The City Council retreat is an opportunity to step back from the operational
decisions that made for the past fiscal year’s successes in order to have a strategic and
broad-based conversation with the City’s executive leadership team in a more informal
and unstructured environment. In the context of the new Framework and a broader
push for Santa Monica to demonstrate the potential of 21st Century government, the
goal of this morning session is to focus on a shared vision of the City’s overall direction.
The essential question is: How can the Council and executive team work together more
effectively with the community to tackle these new 21st century challenges – and
opportunities?
Government in the 21st Century
Getting to the bottom of that question begs another: what is the model of
governance in the 21st century? As the Council has acknowledged with the strength and
sustainability of our local economy, we cannot risk resting on our laurels. As the sole
provider of traditional local services, cities have operated like monopolies. Yet
increasingly the private sector is competing to satisfy needs that were once
automatically assumed to be the domain of the public sector. In a state where
technology is promising that “there’s an app for that,” the public sector must
demonstrate it is delivering cost-effective public value. To do so, the public sector must
take stock of what we have been, and in turn, what we have to become. Like other
traditional industries facing disruption in recent times (newspapers, record companies,
4 of 8
automobiles, travel agents etc.) we must re-examine every aspect of our operating
model or face brutal choices down the road. Because of its robust economy and public
infrastructure and assets, Santa Monica faces less immediate threat than most cities.
Instead, these assets give us a head start to be a model of successful 21st Century
government.
The following table outlines and juxtaposes some features of these two models of
governance. It is not meant to imply stark contrasts so much as an evolution from one
era to the next:
20th Century Governance 21st Century Governance
Provide services Deliver outcomes
Fixed Structure Evolving structure
Chain of Command organizational chart Cross-disciplinary teamwork and
collaboration
Individual transactions and service delivery Ongoing relationship with community
members
Managing operations; achieve compliance Managing performance; achieve results
Hire for expertise, experience and
credentials Hire for talent, potential and fit with values
Government acts as a vending machine Government engages community in “barn
raising”
Line Item Budget Programmatic performance budgets
Driven by long-standing rules, best
practices and expectations
Data-driven – do more of what works and
less of what doesn’t
Drawing inspiration from the entrepreneurial success stories of Silicon Beach and
beyond, our City is approaching the challenge with a focus on embracing agility, testing
and experimenting our way toward optimal solutions. We are beginning to think about
and apply technology, not only to digitize services, but to transform service experiences.
We are cultivating and deploying our human capital to focus on empowerment,
accountability and growth, unlocking the untapped potential of our workforce. We are
harnessing data to be pro-active and on top of trends instead of waiting to react to their
impact.
5 of 8
This session offers an opportunity for Council to reflect with key staff and
community members on our understanding of 21st century government, and how it
applies here in Santa Monica
The City’s Evolution to Define “The Why”
Santa Monica has never shrunk from the challenge of solving big problems. This
zest for exceptional service, however, has come at the price of straining our capacity to
meet growing demands. It is unsustainable to continue to add staff to address new
challenges. As the problems the City is called on to solve become ever more
numerous, complex and dynamic, we must parse with care the important from
the urgent.
Strategy—the decision to prioritize some things over others— has long been the
lifeblood of private sector success. Recognizing the profound differences between
government and private business, there is still much we can learn from the private
sector’s calibrating organizational structure, culture, and operation to strategy.
Council embraced the need to set clear priorities when it formulated the five
Strategic Goals in August 2015. In designing the five goals, Council took the
community’s and staffs’ input, examined the breadth of the City’s initiatives, and
selected those where focused efforts would move the needle most:
●Maintaining an inclusive and diverse community
●Establishing a new model for mobility
●Securing local control of the City land occupied by the Santa Monica Airport
●Taking a leadership role in regional efforts to address homelessness; and
● Fostering a community partnership to Learn and Thrive.
Once identified, the City formed teams for each goal, which focused on
developing plans of action. These living, malleable documents include background
information on each goal area, along with a theory of change (the “why” behind the
6 of 8
goal), and a dashboard, which identifies key outcomes as well as key activities and
metrics designed to achieve agreed upon outcomes. Coordinating efforts across units in
this manner was, and remains, a challenge for an organization structured on old notions
of how governments function. Notwithstanding that impediment, the City progressed in
all five areas.
The Council’s five Strategic Goals represent City’s effort to set clearly articulated
priorities and harmonize efforts across departments on these specific issues. Yet this
effort was not sufficient to capture the overarching vision for the community as well as
create a cohesive structure to manage diverse functions and performance of City
departments. The Framework, developed as part of the City’s biannual budget process
along with SaMoStat (the City’s new performance management system), integrates and
builds on the initial success of defining the five Strategic Goals. The Framework for a
Sustainable City of Wellbeing Built on a Foundation of Good Governance is the City’s
strategic vision, tying organizational purpose to the day-to-day functions of individual
departments. The Framework is organized into six outcome areas, each of which is
broken down into sub-outcomes, clarifying what the City hopes to achieve in specific
areas:
Safe, Connected, and Engaged Community (“Community”);
Resilient Built and Natural Environment (“Place and Planet”);
Lifelong Opportunities for Personal Growth (“Learning”);
Physical, Mental, and Environmental Health (“Health”);
Inclusive Affordable, and Diverse Local Economy (“Economic
Opportunity”); and
Reliable, Effective, and Efficient Government (“Governance”)
Each sub-outcome area includes outcome metrics, designed to measure success
in achieving the overarching outcomes. To guide the Framework forward, questions to
consider at this retreat include: how we might build on data and experience; what does
the shift to a single Framework mean for other city-wide, like the Sustainable City Plan,
or localized efforts; how might we better measure and communicate progress; should
7 of 8
“Safer Community” be its own outcome area given the growing challenges faced by
Santa Monica in that arena?
Alongside efforts at building the capacity for strategic thinking within City Hall, the
City is undertaking a variety of projects to embrace the 21st century model. Ahead of
completing the City Services Building, we are working at modernizing the City’s internal
operations and culture. To meet rising expectations for City services to be available at
the click of a button, anytime, and anywhere, we are crafting a digital strategy. Though
these changes represent new ways of thinking and achieving, the indicators of success
will be what they always have for government: we will have elevated our community’s
sense of trust and satisfaction; we will have identified outcomes and measures with
clarity, and report them with transparency; we will have maintained our fiscal health; we
will have raised our workforce’s effectiveness and satisfaction; and we will both engage
and empower our community.
To ensure the dialogue that comes of this retreat is as engaging and constructive
as possible in driving a shared vision of, and commitment to, 21st century government,
here are a few questions to conclude:
What are the hallmarks of 21st century government in Santa Monica?
How are we progressing toward this transition to a 21st Century
government?
What is the role of citizens, Boards and Commission in informing the
vision and its implementation?
What is the leadership role of the City Council in this transition?
Saturday’s session is designed to foster candid discussion among the Council
and the City’s executive leadership (City Management team, City Attorney, City Clerk
and department heads) to address these key questions.
8 of 8
Prepared By: Ari Spitzer, Assistant Administrative Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Written Comments
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Wednesday, April 18, 2018 9:18 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Fw: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project-"Digitalized Citizen Record"
From: Sherry Martini [mailto:sherryannmartini@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 9:01 AM
To: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Lane Dilg <Lane.Dilg@SMGOV.NET>; Lisa Parson <Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Tony Vazquez
<Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kate Cagle <kate@smdp.com>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Denise
Anderson‐Warren <Denise.Anderson‐Warren@SMGOV.NET>; Representative Ted Lieu <ca33tlima@mail.house.gov>;
Representative Ted Lieu <lieu.veterans@mail.house.gov>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>;
media@rand.org; michael_Rich@rand.org; Margaret_Schumacher@rand.org; anita_chandra@rand.org
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project‐"Digitalized Citizen Record"
I have corrected my email below because I typed it in a hurry to early in the morning. I will send this corrected email to be
included in the packet for the Saturday, April 21, 2018 City Council meeting.
On Wednesday, April 18, 2018, 8:18:29 AM PDT, Sherry Martini <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com> wrote:
A few of us have been warning about the collection of our data, but now with the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica story,
maybe the below email chain from Summer 2017 will make more sense to you. Now apparently you will be creating
"digitalized citizen" data for all of us (apparently to be discussed at this Saturday City Council meeting at Virginia
Park), The fact that you partner with Rand to collect data on us (who in turn partners with venture capitalists and out-of-
country corporations) is literally terrifying. Rand makes Cambridge Analytica look good. As spelled out in the below email
chain (and as you know), even if Rand does some good (they do), ultimately Rand's master is the military. They are using
our data in the Artificial Intelligence race -- information is better than gold in this age -- and the information will ultimately
be used to the detriment of most human beings (think drones, soldier robots, etc.) Do the research and please wake up.
1. With this email, I request a copy of all digitalized data the city has on me:
Sherry Ann Talbot
Shery Talbot
Sherry Ann Martini (my married name)
Sherry Martini
2. I would also like to know who has/will have access to our "digitalized" record. Please provide me copies of all
protocols re the saving and dissemination of citizens' data collected as part of the Wellbeing project, and other data
collected by the City on citizens.
3. Please provide me with proof that the WellBeing Project data is NOT shared with the listed parnters of the WellBeing
Project beyond Rand (most of whom are out of the country).
I always tried to tell people that information can be good, but in wrong hands it can be used in frightening ways. Having
Trump in office, who now has access to personal information about all of us, is a good example. No one ever thought a
man like him would be elected, but it happened.
Thank you.
Sherry Martini
Item 4-A
4/21/18
1 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
2
Activist
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Sherry Talbot <hominita@aol.com>
To: "Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET" <Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>; "rick.cole@smgov.net" <rick.cole@smgov.net>
Cc: "sherryannmartini@yahoo.com" <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017, 11:08:02 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project
Julie did call me once and I called back but do not recall receiving a follow up call. Perhaps it was because she felt I'd
said what I wanted to say in the message I left.
Lisa, I hear a lot about anonymous surveys. As you know, nothing is anonymous anymore and the ONLY way these
surveys can provide "meaningful" information is if they are longitudinal, which means you know who you are tracking. One
doesn't need to type in their name to be tracked. You know this. In addition, when you say the only person you share
information with is Anita Chandra at RAND, who do you think she shares that with? And what about all the out-of-country
corporate organizations that are helping to fund the project? Of course the information is shared with them.
As I said before, I encourage you to read "THE PENTAGON'S BRAIN", by Annie Jacobson, a Pulitzer nominated
investigative journalist, formerly with the Los Angeles Times. I'll attach just one article about the book, but there are many
from extremely reputable sources. She speaks in the book of the DARPA/RAND connection and how, as is often the
case, what one assumes has been developed for the public good, will actually be used by the military to harm. A great
deal of surveillance methods were developed through DARPA/RAND and it is said they are working on an artificial
intelligence project that depends on vast amounts of information from as many people as possible. Thus the supposed
WELL BEING PROJECT, which you can find nationwide now, is a perfect tool for RAND. Many very prominent scientists
have warned us about "artificial intelligence" push, especially if used by the wrong people. To me, the "wrong people"
would be the military.
Jacobson further contends that the endgame for most of the tools developed by DARPA/RAND are for military
use. Which means to kill and maim. For instance, it is suspected that the testing for the new prosthetic devices DARPA,
and by association RAND, is developing for the thousands and thousands of soldiers who have returned from Afghanistan
and Iraq will eventually be used to engineer robotic like soldiers to fight our "dirty wars". That may seem nice -- American
humans don't have to die -- but I don't want to live in a world where we send robots to kill people so indiscriminately. We
are already doing that with drones, thanks to DARPA and therefore RAND, and I find that to be the most inhumane way
for a person to die. So many innocent people have lost their lives this way. There are several important movies out about
former drone operators. I encourage you to find them and watch them.
And why are so many out-of-country corporations funding this research. You must ask yourself this.
So, I just have to stand up because I know what RAND is and what it pretends to be. It is a military complex and its sole
purpose is to serve its master -- the military. There is just no debate about it. Even when they do all the great work with
the Mars Rover and such, they will eventually use it for military purposes. And our planet cannot survive that
mentality. Already a RAND scientist has said North Korea has the hydrogen bomb (so similar to the weapons of mass
destruction story that started the Iraq war), which is ironic since RAND helped make the hydrogen bomb happen here in
the US. So this RAND scientist will share this possibly flawed information with our crazy and unwell "president" and it
could be the end of us all.
And that's why I am concerned. A military mind-set will not save us. Only oddball moms like me, concerned parents and
our kids can stop this military complex from destroying the planet and all the people on it.
Thank you.
Sherry Martini
Activist
but mostly a mom trying to assure something will be left for my children
"Few experts think North Korea will get close to mastering the secrets of true hydrogen bombs any time soon,
if ever. But they cite a range of evidence suggesting that the isolated nation is now working hard to raise the
destructive force of its nuclear arsenal with thermonuclear fire.
“It’s possible that North Korea has already boosted,” Gregory S. Jones, a scientist at the RAND
Corporation, said of the first step down the thermonuclear road."
Item 4-A
4/21/18
2 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
3
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/science/north-korea-nuclear-weapons.html
Article re "Pentagon's Brain" (and it's ties to RAND, etc.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-secretive-government-agency-where-anything-imagined-can-be-
tried/2015/10/08/3227bc0c-50ce-11e5-933e-7d06c647a395_story.html?utm_term=.7a1aa19863d0
-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Parson <Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>
To: hominita <hominita@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Jul 11, 2017 8:08 am
Subject: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project
Hi Sherry,
I believe you were contacted by our Project Lead, Julie Rusk, when you originally reached out to us. She left you a few
voicemails- I hope you received them. I am the Project Manager for the Wellbeing Project and wanted to clarify some
things to ease your concerns around the sharing of personal data. The only individual level data we use to develop the
Wellbeing Index comes from our Wellbeing Survey. We do not ask users for personal information like name, address, etc.,
only demographic information; age, gender, zip code, and race/ethnicity, and include language at the start of the survey
outlining the confidentiality of the data that is submitted with a chance to opt out before the survey begins. I understand
your concerns regarding RAND’s military work, and want you to know our data is not shared throughout the RAND
organization- the City owns and stores the data, and only our lead researcher, Anita Chandra has access to it. She has a
long career focused in early childhood issues, community wellbeing and resilience, and the environment. The only work
she has done involving the military was to study the impact of deployment of a parent on military families from a health
perspective.
I hope this helps to address some of your concerns. The main thing I want to stress is that we do not collect personally
identifying data on any residents. The Wellbeing Project is all about understanding how we can improve the quality of life
of our residents, and we certainly don’t think that sharing personal information without their consent would help improve
anything! Thank you for contacting us to share your concerns. Please contact me directly at lisa.parson@smgov.net if you
have any further questions.
Thanks,
Lisa
From: "no-reply@smgov.net" <no-reply@smgov.net>
Date: Monday, July 3, 2017 at 8:39 AM
To: Office of Civic Wellbeing <wellbeing@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Email from Wellbeing Website
Wellbeing Contact Form
Subject: Information Request
Name: Sherry Martini
Email: hominita@aol.com
Telephone: (310) 451-5088
Note:
No one ever returned my call about the use of RAND for the "Well Being Project." RAND always has been
and always will be a secret government organization that uses data to serve it's main customer -- the Military.
Now the Military is intertwined with corporate sponsors, many not of the United States, in order to further
huge corporate and military interests. RAND and DARPA are so deeply connected, which is very
concerning. RAND fronts as a philanthropic non-profit seeking only the public good, but as "The Pentagon's
Item 4-A
4/21/18
3 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
4
Brain" and other books and deep research illustrate, RAND's main concern is military advancement. The City
of Santa Monica is sharing all of our PERSONAL resident data with RAND, and probably even paying
RAND for being associated with the Well Being Project. This will only provide more fuel for RAND to
continue to harm our planet. Read up on RAND and DARPA if you have not. They are dangerous bedfellows
and we have handed over to them our intimate data about our families, our children, our thoughts. They will
not use is to a good end.
Item 4-A
4/21/18
4 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:advocacy@whatleyzepeda.net
Sent:Wednesday, April 18, 2018 4:57 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Special Meeting - Virginia Avenue Park - Saturday April 21, 2018
April 18, 2018
Dear City Clerk's Office,
I copied you on the below email sent to the Council regarding this Saturday's upcoming Special Meeting.
Please add my comments to the Public Comments portion of the meeting as I will be unable to attend in person.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
David Whatley
-----Original Message-----
From: "advocacy@whatleyzepeda.net" <advocacy@whatleyzepeda.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 16:53
To: council@smgov.net
Cc: clerk@smgov.net
Subject: Special Meeting - Virginia Avenue Park - Saturday April 21, 2018
April 21, 2018
The Honorable Santa Monica City Council---
Dear Council,
As many of you I believe are aware, my name is David Whatley and I am the founder of David Whatley Advocacy. --My advocacy in
our City began several years ago, when, while riding my bike on Colorado Ave., I ran into fellow-residents holding signs along the
sidewalk...the signs stated that we as a City should not displace elderly and disabled residents from their homes. --It turns out these
residents were Village Trailer Park residents and they asked me for my support. --I just felt, and still feel the same way to this day,
like it was completely wrong to treat elderly and disabled residents that way: like many in our City, I gave our fellow-residents my
support whole-heartedly: this was---my entrance (if you will) into Santa Monica politics, if you will--and it is during this time period
when I first began to attend Council meetings.
As some of you may recall (can't remember if I had voted for any of you at that time...but I do believe that at least 2 of you were
appointed to the dais rather than elected by the people of Santa Monica) I spoke to the Council in support of Village Trailer Park
residents, urging the Council to allow them to stay in their homes. --As I believe you are aware, the Council at that time ultimately
ended up voting to displace our Village Trailer Park residents, despite significant opposition from residents.
The title of this upcoming Saturday's Special Meeting is "2018 Council Retreat: 21st Century Government, Council's Five Strategic
Goals, and the Performance Management Framework". --Part of City Staff's recommended action is that you receive updates.
I would like for you to receive this update: if we want to be a successful 21st Century Government, then we must learn from our City's
mistakes from the past and we must treat all residents with dignity, respect, and in accordance with the protections of the Constitution.
--And we must treat residents in this manner, irrespective if they come from a protected class....like having a disability, being a senior
citizen, or coming from a particular ethnic group. Furthermore, to be a successful 21st Century Government, we must not retaliate
against residents who make us angry because of their political activity. Finally, in order to be a successful 21st Century Government,
we should recuse ourselves from voting on development deals from which we have benefited financially.
Item 4-A
4/21/18
5 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
2
The Village Trailer Park case; the Elizabeth Riel case; the Justin Palmer case; the Faye Wells case; and the Pico Neighborhood case---
amongst a host of many others---these are are all examples that we have a long way to go in our City until we reach the standard to
which we have all been called.
I urge you to incorporate this feedback into your retreat this Saturday.
Further, the fact that you are having this retreat in the Pico Neighborhood should serve as a reminder to you: the civil rights
guaranteed by and other protections provided by the Constitution apply to all Santa Monica residents...even those who are of Mexican
descent. Although Mexican residents from the Pico neighborhood have a history of being mistreated in the 20th century, we have the
opportunity to turn the page in the 21st century: Santa Monica residents deserve to elect a representative of his or her choice to
represent them in local government....rather than be stuck with 2 of you who were appointed to your positions.
Sincerely,
David Whatley
cc:
Santa Monica City Clerk
Item 4-A
4/21/18
6 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Sherry Martini <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, April 18, 2018 10:30 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Fw: Re: RE: Fw: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project-"Digitalized Citizen Record"
An update for council meeting on April 21.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Sherry Martini <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com>
To: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Tony Vazquez
<Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kate Cagle <kate@smdp.com>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Denise
Anderson-Warren <Denise.Anderson-Warren@SMGOV.NET>; Representative Ted Lieu <ca33tlima@mail.house.gov>;
Representative Ted Lieu <lieu.veterans@mail.house.gov>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>;
media@rand.org <media@rand.org>; michael_Rich@rand.org <michael_Rich@rand.org>;
Margaret_Schumacher@rand.org <Margaret_Schumacher@rand.org>; anita_chandra@rand.org
<anita_chandra@rand.org>; Lane Dilg <Lane.Dilg@SMGOV.NET>; Lisa Parson <Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>;
anuj.gupta@smgov.net <anuj.gupta@smgov.net>; george.cardona@smgov.net <george.cardona@smgov.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018, 10:29:07 PM PDT
Subject: Re: RE: Fw: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project-"Digitalized Citizen Record"
Rick, one more question to add to my repsonse below, based on re-reading your response to me: You said: "But we have
no interest in tracking the individual information provided through the survey except by demographic and geographic
cohort. We do not share anything beyond the anonymized results of the survey."
I know you believe your above statement to be true and I know you are an honest person -- but are you sure it
is accurate? Have you done the deep research? Remember, Cambridge Analytica supposedly told Facebook
that they did not save the data they were given -- that they deleted it, etc. etc., If someone as sophisticated as
Facebook can be allegedly fooled as to what is being done with data that was provided to an outside party,
how can you possibly know for certain what Rand and its partners are doing with our data. And like the
principals and teachers in our district who are told their students' very personal survey's are anonymous (they
are not as indicated below), can you with complete knowledge state that surveys our residents take are
"anonymous" with no ability for RAND and its partners to access our IP addresses and names and therefore
know our personal wants, wishes, problems, etc., etc. Or are you just assuming this is the case because
Rand tells you this? Please do the research.
On Wednesday, April 18, 2018, 10:05:46 PM PDT, Sherry Martini <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com> wrote:
Thank you for your response Rick. I do appreciate your taking the time to spell out your take on the situation.
I know digital privacy advocates are often thrown into the lot of those who believe "the moon landing is fake" along with
other conspiracy theories. I'm used to that. However, I was hoping with the recent revelations about Facebook, which
have finally been made public, that local officials (i.e, our school districts and City officials) who have access to our data
would be more "aware" and take it a bit more seriously.
Please know this. Nothing is anonyous any more. Just check your Facebook Archive data (it's a must--you have to
request it through settings and then they send it to you). When we fill out surveys ANYWHERE our IP addresses, linked
to our names, are stored. When our kids take surveys in our schools on their school-issued electronic devices, giving
private information like sexual orientation and practices, drug use, etc, they are tracked on their computer device and with
an ID number that is linked to their name. I know teachers and principals are told they are not tracked, but they are tied to
their ID number or computer device and they are NOT anonymous. That is important to know.
Rick, I can't really make any change on a national level -- can't go against Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Dell, etc., who
collect and analyize our data for profit and control (and most of these companies have also built back doors for
Item 4-A
4/21/18
7 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
2
government access, according to Edward Snowden and others--imagine, now a man like Donald Trump has all that
information at his fingertips.) But am I wrong to at least hope that my local officials become more aware of the dangers
and risks associated with big data collection?
On the Wellbeing website Rand is not portrayed acurately. It is listed as "research organization" that helps people, with
no mention of it's base military purpose:
"The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make
communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous.."
You state:
"As to the 'nature' of Rand, no one is under any illusion about the nature of their long-standing relationship to
the military. If, however, the military and Rand want to collect personal data on American citizens and are
willing to lie and cheat a municipal government to do so, they certainly could lie and cheat their way to much
more extensive and intrusive data than the anodyne answers to survey questions about wellbeing. If those
fears are valid, we have far more serious problems with our democracy than the misuse of survey data."
Unfortunately, when it comes to Rand, I do feel those fears are valid. I was told by Lisa Parson (who was polite and nice)
that: "The City owns and stores the data, and only our lead researcher, Anita Chandra has access to it (the data-
emphasis added)." First, Lisa neglects to mention that Anita Chandra works for RAND, not the City, so I'm not sure why
Lisa refers to her as "our" lead researcher. I'm sure Anita is a nice person as well, but let's talk moon landings. I can tell
you that I believe with all my heart that we did land on the moon, though no one can prove it to me. I am as sure that we
landed on the moon as I am that our personal data is shared with more than just one person at Rand, though, as you say,
you can't prove it was not shared with more than one person.
So it's more than safe to assume -- though we can't prove it -- that our data is not only shared with Rand, a military think
tank to its core, but all the Rand Partners, like British think tank New Economics Foundation, which on it's face seems
nice, but have you looked deeper into who runs this "Foundation." I worked for a think tank right here in Santa Monica
years ago. It had nice photos of philanthropic advocacy everywhere. But I can tell you it was nothing more than a venture
capital firm, run by a mega Billionaire, seeking to influence emerging markets, etc., with strong ties with the CIA. So, I am
naturally skeptical. Have you checked into the other companies working with Rand on this, like "Daylight", etc.? Have you
determined who their founders are, who is on the Boards of these companies, and what their privacy policies
are? Because when I was looking into Microsoft's insertion into our schools via Bill Gates, what I found was that most of
the people involved (owners/Board Members) with the companies/subsidiaries partnering with Microsoft on education
were venture capitalists, though their company names sounded so nice. I also found that often their privacy policies
contained huge loopholes or were almost non-existent and that our kids data was being shared and then mined by
venture capitalists for profit. So, there's that. They are engaging in "Venture Philanthropy" -- make the consumer think
you are helping others and the planet but the true end game is money and control. And it's not a conspiracy. I'd be happy
to show you my research and the research of countless others. Sure, there must be some altruistic corporations. I'm a
big fan of Space X -- infatuated actually. But most are out for their own good, not ours. It is the way of our world of late,
and that is why we have so many people hurting. And that's why I am fighting this.
Finally, I encourage you to see the movie by director Chris Paine (of "Who Killed the Electric Car" fame) called "Do You
Trust this Computer," if you haven't already. Elon Musk paid for all of us to watch it for free for a week -- and it was
playing in theaters in Santa Monica last week -- but you can still watch it online for a few dollars. It is an important movie
about data collection and the end game -- advanced and FULL Artificial Intelligence. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and
DARPA(Rand's partner) are all in a race to "get there first" and big data is how they "get there" It's an important movie.
Thank you for your time.
Sherry
Mom
Activist
On Wednesday, April 18, 2018, 5:54:37 PM PDT, Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET> wrote:
Sherry:
Item 4-A
4/21/18
8 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
3
We are not talking about “digitalized citizen” data at Saturday’s retreat. Perhaps this misapprehension comes
from the staff report that simply references the techtonic changes that are occurring in our society that
government must be aware of and react to.
In the future we do anticipate having better integration of our public records. We recognize this comes with
advantages and concerns. No one wants to maintain personal data on individuals in our community – but it
does make sense to be able to change an address for a library card at the same time it is done for a water
bill. There does need to be public scrutiny and safeguards built into our systems as they become more
integrated. But trust me, credit bureaus, social media sites and other businesses already have far more data
that is far more personal than anything maintained by the City outside of Police and Fire records that are
already governed by strict State and Federal legislation and protocols.
Since the City doesn’t have any centralized data base on its citizens, responding to your request about what
records we maintain for the various versions of your name would mean manually searching our Library user
database, our Recreation class sign-up program, our water bill records etc. Since there is no central “digitized
record” no one strictly speaking has access to it. Depending upon the kind of records we maintain, the access
may be highly restricted (criminal investigations, for example) or relatively relaxed (I’m sure quite a few Library
staff can look up your name and address if you have a library card.)
As to “proof” that data is not being shared for the Wellbeing Project, it is hard to definitively prove a negative. I
can’t prove that the moon landing wasn’t faked, for example. Rand has access to the survey data because
they are our partners in preparing the Wellbeing Index. But we have no interest in tracking the individual
information provided through the survey except by demographic and geographic cohort. We do not share
anything beyond the anonymized results of the survey.
As to the “nature” of Rand, no one is under any illusion about the nature of their long-standing relationship to
the military. If, however, the military and Rand want to collect personal data on American citizens and are
willing to lie and cheat a municipal government to do so, they certainly could lie and cheat their way to much
more extensive and intrusive data than the anodyne answers to survey questions about wellbeing. If those
fears are valid, we have far more serious problems with our democracy than the misuse of survey data.
Item 4-A
4/21/18
9 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
4
Mission of the City Manager’s Office: The City Manager's Office leads the team of City departments and
staff to achieve the City Council's vision of a thriving community of sustainable wellbeing.
Our mission is to foster collaboration and innovation to create a 21st century city that works for everyone.
From: Sherry Martini [mailto:sherryannmartini@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 9:01 AM
To: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Lane Dilg <Lane.Dilg@SMGOV.NET>; Lisa Parson
<Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Tony
Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kate Cagle <kate@smdp.com>; Clerk Mailbox
<Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Denise Anderson-Warren <Denise.Anderson-Warren@SMGOV.NET>;
Representative Ted Lieu <ca33tlima@mail.house.gov>; Representative Ted Lieu
<lieu.veterans@mail.house.gov>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; media@rand.org;
michael_Rich@rand.org; Margaret_Schumacher@rand.org; anita_chandra@rand.org
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project-"Digitalized Citizen Record"
I have corrected my email below because I typed it in a hurry to early in the morning. I will send this corrected email to be
included in the packet for the Saturday, April 21, 2018 City Council meeting.
On Wednesday, April 18, 2018, 8:18:29 AM PDT, Sherry Martini <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com> wrote:
A few of us have been warning about the collection of our data, but now with the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica story,
maybe the below email chain from Summer 2017 will make more sense to you. Now apparently you will be creating
"digitalized citizen" data for all of us (apparently to be discussed at this Saturday City Council meeting at Virginia
Park), The fact that you partner with Rand to collect data on us (who in turn partners with venture capitalists and out-of-
country corporations) is literally terrifying. Rand makes Cambridge Analytica look good. As spelled out in the below email
chain (and as you know), even if Rand does some good (they do), ultimately Rand's master is the military. They are using
our data in the Artificial Intelligence race -- information is better than gold in this age -- and the information will ultimately
be used to the detriment of most human beings (think drones, soldier robots, etc.) Do the research and please wake up.
1. With this email, I request a copy of all digitalized data the city has on me:
Sherry Ann Talbot
Shery Talbot
Sherry Ann Martini (my married name)
Sherry Martini
Item 4-A
4/21/18
10 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
5
2. I would also like to know who has/will have access to our "digitalized" record. Please provide me copies of all
protocols re the saving and dissemination of citizens' data collected as part of the Wellbeing project, and other data
collected by the City on citizens.
3. Please provide me with proof that the WellBeing Project data is NOT shared with the listed parnters of the WellBeing
Project beyond Rand (most of whom are out of the country).
I always tried to tell people that information can be good, but in wrong hands it can be used in frightening ways. Having
Trump in office, who now has access to personal information about all of us, is a good example. No one ever thought a
man like him would be elected, but it happened.
Thank you.
Sherry Martini
Activist
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Sherry Talbot <hominita@aol.com>
To: "Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET" <Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>; "rick.cole@smgov.net" <rick.cole@smgov.net>
Cc: "sherryannmartini@yahoo.com" <sherryannmartini@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017, 11:08:02 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project
Julie did call me once and I called back but do not recall receiving a follow up call. Perhaps it was because she felt I'd
said what I wanted to say in the message I left.
Lisa, I hear a lot about anonymous surveys. As you know, nothing is anonymous anymore and the ONLY way these
surveys can provide "meaningful" information is if they are longitudinal, which means you know who you are tracking. One
doesn't need to type in their name to be tracked. You know this. In addition, when you say the only person you share
information with is Anita Chandra at RAND, who do you think she shares that with? And what about all the out-of-country
corporate organizations that are helping to fund the project? Of course the information is shared with them.
Item 4-A
4/21/18
11 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
6
As I said before, I encourage you to read "THE PENTAGON'S BRAIN", by Annie Jacobson, a Pulitzer nominated
investigative journalist, formerly with the Los Angeles Times. I'll attach just one article about the book, but there are many
from extremely reputable sources. She speaks in the book of the DARPA/RAND connection and how, as is often the
case, what one assumes has been developed for the public good, will actually be used by the military to harm. A great
deal of surveillance methods were developed through DARPA/RAND and it is said they are working on an artificial
intelligence project that depends on vast amounts of information from as many people as possible. Thus the supposed
WELL BEING PROJECT, which you can find nationwide now, is a perfect tool for RAND. Many very prominent scientists
have warned us about "artificial intelligence" push, especially if used by the wrong people. To me, the "wrong people"
would be the military.
Jacobson further contends that the endgame for most of the tools developed by DARPA/RAND are for military
use. Which means to kill and maim. For instance, it is suspected that the testing for the new prosthetic devices DARPA,
and by association RAND, is developing for the thousands and thousands of soldiers who have returned from Afghanistan
and Iraq will eventually be used to engineer robotic like soldiers to fight our "dirty wars". That may seem nice -- American
humans don't have to die -- but I don't want to live in a world where we send robots to kill people so indiscriminately. We
are already doing that with drones, thanks to DARPA and therefore RAND, and I find that to be the most inhumane way
for a person to die. So many innocent people have lost their lives this way. There are several important movies out about
former drone operators. I encourage you to find them and watch them.
And why are so many out-of-country corporations funding this research. You must ask yourself this.
So, I just have to stand up because I know what RAND is and what it pretends to be. It is a military complex and its sole
purpose is to serve its master -- the military. There is just no debate about it. Even when they do all the great work with
the Mars Rover and such, they will eventually use it for military purposes. And our planet cannot survive that
mentality. Already a RAND scientist has said North Korea has the hydrogen bomb (so similar to the weapons of mass
destruction story that started the Iraq war), which is ironic since RAND helped make the hydrogen bomb happen here in
the US. So this RAND scientist will share this possibly flawed information with our crazy and unwell "president" and it
could be the end of us all.
And that's why I am concerned. A military mind-set will not save us. Only oddball moms like me, concerned parents and
our kids can stop this military complex from destroying the planet and all the people on it.
Thank you.
Sherry Martini
Activist
but mostly a mom trying to assure something will be left for my children
"Few experts think North Korea will get close to mastering the secrets of true hydrogen bombs any time
soon, if ever. But they cite a range of evidence suggesting that the isolated nation is now working hard to
raise the destructive force of its nuclear arsenal with thermonuclear fire.
“It’s possible that North Korea has already boosted,” Gregory S. Jones, a scientist at the RAND
Corporation, said of the first step down the thermonuclear road."
Item 4-A
4/21/18
12 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
7
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/science/north-korea-nuclear-weapons.html
Article re "Pentagon's Brain" (and it's ties to RAND, etc.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-secretive-government-agency-where-anything-imagined-can-be-
tried/2015/10/08/3227bc0c-50ce-11e5-933e-7d06c647a395_story.html?utm_term=.7a1aa19863d0
-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Parson <Lisa.Parson@SMGOV.NET>
To: hominita <hominita@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Jul 11, 2017 8:08 am
Subject: Concerns about The Wellbeing Project
Hi Sherry,
I believe you were contacted by our Project Lead, Julie Rusk, when you originally reached out to us. She left you a few
voicemails- I hope you received them. I am the Project Manager for the Wellbeing Project and wanted to clarify some
things to ease your concerns around the sharing of personal data. The only individual level data we use to develop the
Wellbeing Index comes from our Wellbeing Survey. We do not ask users for personal information like name, address, etc.,
only demographic information; age, gender, zip code, and race/ethnicity, and include language at the start of the survey
outlining the confidentiality of the data that is submitted with a chance to opt out before the survey begins. I understand
your concerns regarding RAND’s military work, and want you to know our data is not shared throughout the RAND
organization- the City owns and stores the data, and only our lead researcher, Anita Chandra has access to it. She has a
long career focused in early childhood issues, community wellbeing and resilience, and the environment. The only work
she has done involving the military was to study the impact of deployment of a parent on military families from a health
perspective.
I hope this helps to address some of your concerns. The main thing I want to stress is that we do not collect personally
identifying data on any residents. The Wellbeing Project is all about understanding how we can improve the quality of life
of our residents, and we certainly don’t think that sharing personal information without their consent would help improve
anything! Thank you for contacting us to share your concerns. Please contact me directly at lisa.parson@smgov.net if you
have any further questions.
Thanks,
Lisa
Item 4-A
4/21/18
13 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
8
From: "no-reply@smgov.net" <no-reply@smgov.net>
Date: Monday, July 3, 2017 at 8:39 AM
To: Office of Civic Wellbeing <wellbeing@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Email from Wellbeing Website
Wellbeing Contact Form
Subject: Information Request
Name: Sherry Martini
Email: hominita@aol.com
Telephone: (310) 451-5088
Note:
No one ever returned my call about the use of RAND for the "Well Being Project." RAND always has been
and always will be a secret government organization that uses data to serve it's main customer -- the Military.
Now the Military is intertwined with corporate sponsors, many not of the United States, in order to further
huge corporate and military interests. RAND and DARPA are so deeply connected, which is very
concerning. RAND fronts as a philanthropic non-profit seeking only the public good, but as "The Pentagon's
Brain" and other books and deep research illustrate, RAND's main concern is military advancement. The City
of Santa Monica is sharing all of our PERSONAL resident data with RAND, and probably even paying
RAND for being associated with the Well Being Project. This will only provide more fuel for RAND to
continue to harm our planet. Read up on RAND and DARPA if you have not. They are dangerous bedfellows
and we have handed over to them our intimate data about our families, our children, our thoughts. They will
not use is to a good end.
Item 4-A
4/21/18
14 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Mary MARLOW <m.marlow@verizon.net>
Sent:Friday, April 20, 2018 10:04 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Mary Marlow; Terry O’Day; Pam OConnor; Gleam Davis; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Ted
Winterer; Tony Vazquez; Sue Himmelrich
Subject:Twenty-First Century Governance
Attachments:Seattle Car Share Program Update.pdf
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I won’t be able to attend the special meeting Saturday at Virginia Avenue Park, so I’m sharing some thoughts
on twenty-first century governance. Before you spend time on the future, please look at the present state of City
services. The City lags in important services to residents and businesses alike in the permit process, code
compliance and traffic management. These problems need your attention now.
A consultant was hired over a year ago to look at streamlining the slow and error prone permit process, yet no
discernible process has been made. Where is the timesaving in updating the Zoning Code across the City a
couple of years back? Where are the apps to apply and follow up on building, landscape and other
permits? Please consider trying some new trial approaches to these longstanding problem areas.
Code compliance complaints have gone on for months with no resolution. For example, the strip mall at 2901
Ocean Park has not responded to multiple compliance requests to limit traffic on side streets for more than a
year. Residential owners intruding into back and side yard setbacks and owners with vacant building violations
remain unresolved. Again, why not try some new approaches to address and follow up on approaches that
work.
Traffic management lags with only partial traffic signal synchronization leading to long backups as cars exit the
10 Freeway or attempt to travel east/west on Colorado between Lincoln and 4th Street, for example. The City
has a Pedestrian Plan, a Bike Plan, a Safe Routes To School Plan, but no Car/Car share or Delivery Plan. The
new construction in downtown, especially on Lincoln, begs for attention to management of competing uses of
the streets by busses, bikes, cars, electric scooters, delivery services and ride share. Your Saturday meeting
itself, will exacerbate traffic in the Virginia Park area because the meeting is scheduled on the same day and
time as the Pico Farmer’s Market in Virginia Park. Street improvements such as marking street space for drop
off and delivery and scheduling delivery times should be tried.
The City could be doing pilot programs trying out one-way streets, ride share and delivery dedicated spaces on
streets and other new solutions to see what works and then implement it without delay. Studies have shown in
other western cities that innovative pilots can make a difference. See attached Seattle Car Share Study.
I urge you to look at solving today’s problems with innovative trials and faster implementation of solutions
before contemplating possible future areas of concern.
Respectfully,
Mary Marlow
Ocean Park Resident
Item 4-A
4/21/18
15 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
4/19/2018 Seattle Car Share Program Update
http://sdotblog.seattle.gov/2016/03/04/seattle-car-share-program-update/1/7
Seattle Car Share Program Update
March 4, 2016 by Norm Mah
In January 2015, the Seattle City Council adopted legislation expanding the free-floating
car share program, establishing revised permit fees, and delegating to SDOT the authority
to set caps on the number of free-floating car share permits and operators by Director ’s
Rule.
To determine whether to cap the number of permits for 2016 and beyond, SDOT analyzed
data from the 2015 annual free-floating car share member survey; the City’s 2014 and
2015 annual paid parking study; inquiries received by the public; and membership data
provided by the current permitted operator.
Personal Vehicle Ownership: Based on data collected as a part of the 2015 annual free-
floating car share survey, done in coordination with the University of California at
Berkeley:
14% of free-floating car share members in Seattle indicated that they have given up a
vehicle since joining the service
Fifty percent of this group, or 7% of the total of those surveyed, indicated that this
was at least partially due to the availability of free-floating car share.
Extrapolating these results to approximately 65,000 free-floating car share members
in Seattle indicates that car-share users may have given up approximately 9,100
vehicles with approximately 4,550 of them related directly to the availability of free-
floating car share services.
Neighborhood Business District Customer Access: In 2014 and 2015, the on-street
parking data collection included a count of free-floating car share vehicles in each paid
parking area. The 2015 data indicated that:
Occupancy of free-floating car share vehicles was generally less than 5% of available
parking spaces
Free-floating car share vehicles typically parked for less time than most other
vehicles, usually one hour or less
Search this
Visit our We
CATEGORI
Select Cat
ARCHIVES
Select Mo
CONTACT U
Call 206-684
Seattle.gov
SDOT Blog
Department of Transportation
Item 4-A
4/21/18
16 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18
4/19/2018 Seattle Car Share Program Update
http://sdotblog.seattle.gov/2016/03/04/seattle-car-share-program-update/2/7
In 2015, SDOT received only one complaint from a neighborhood business district
related to free-floating car share use of business district parking
Based on this data, free-floating car share vehicles have been shown to occupy a relatively
small amount of business district on-street parking and those vehicles typically turn over
more frequently, allowing other uses of and consistent customer and visitor access to the
curb space.
Addition vehicles will increase the density of vehicles per service area, make them more
easily available, and allow us to extend the service to low-income neighborhoods via City
sponsored programs.
Research has indicated that shared mobility and transit working together to fill gaps
provide connections and support car-light lifestyle.
Based on recent research by the Shared-Use Mobility Center and the Urban Sustainability
Directors Network (USDN) Washington DC, a City comparable in size to Seattle, has
nearly 30 carsharing vehicles per 10,000 residents, while Seattle has fewer than 15
carsharing vehicles per 10,000 residents.
Based on the data collected and analysis, SDOT does not believe that the number of
operators or permits per operator should be capped.
SDOT will continue working with operators to ensure they are distributing vehicles to
provide equitable access throughout the city, and will evaluate the program annually to
determine the extent it is achieving the free-floating car share program goals as
established in the Seattle Municipal Code.
Filed Under: General, Parking, SDOT
Embed
Tweets
ALL ARE WE
We'll be part
hosted by th
Saturday & w
w/partners a
participants
easily and af
How cycling
women. thea
seatt
@se
seatt
@se
SDOT PHO
Item 4-A
4/21/18
17 of 17 Item 4-A
4/21/18