A category is not a recipient.
“Law enforcement partners” does not tell residents which entities receive City surveillance information. Our draft requires a public register naming the recipients, their agreements, authorized purposes and actual sharing activity.
Where the proposed boundary falls.
Voluntary interagency sharing would be limited to eligible Texas state and local agencies on a documented case basis. Agencies from other states or countries and federal agencies would be excluded, even when a federal office is located in Texas. Routing information through vendors or task forces would not bypass the restriction.
Binding law still controls.
A municipal ordinance cannot override a controlling disclosure obligation or an enforceable court order. The draft treats legally compelled transfers separately and calls for reporting to the extent disclosure is lawful. That exception should not become routine voluntary network access.
A proposed change, not a claim of current compliance.
NBPD’s published policy addresses information sharing, agreements and searches. Our proposal adds a different set of limits and public reporting duties. The campaign website’s hosting providers are not the City’s proposed recipient register; these are separate systems and obligations.
Read the sharing and transparency provisions ↗ · Compare the existing NBPD policy ↗
Help prepare the petition.
The online list prepares supporters for a later handwritten signature. It does not count toward the official petition.
Prepare to sign