You. Good evening, and welcome to kqed news room, im thuy vu. Sam liccardo beat out his opponent by a slim margin, chuck reed, the incumbent, endorsed him. Liccardo supports pension reform and has angered the police union as a result. One of his challenges will be to mend that relationship as he works to move san jose forward. Sam liccardo spoke earlier with scott schafer. Sam liccardo, welcome to news room. So you beat david cortese, in a very tight race, the city is divid divided. How will you heal the rift . Well, it is not unusual, three of the last four races in san jose have been by similar margins. I have a lot of bridgebuilding to do. Im reaching out to the Public Employee unions, they didnt support me, they spent a lot of money to fight against me. Are you sure about that . Im pretty certain about that. Well meet with the leaders and the city you were of course endorsed by the incumbent, chuck reid, for some he was a polarizing figure, he struck a harsh note, some would say, with the police union. Do you feel you need or want to offer an olive branch to the police in particular . Well, yes, for chuck reid that is the price of leadership in a time of crisis. We faced a severe crisis. We led the way we needed to move in a time where we simply didnt have many choices if we were going to keep the city solvent. How will you be different from the current mayor . You know, i think in terms of fiscal issues we have a strong alignment. But i think there are new opportunities ahead. And you know, im having conversations about how we can do things around Public Safety that dont simply involve discussions about pensions and badges and guns. I mean, there are opportunities for us to expand jobs programs for atrisk youth in the summertime. Opportunities to expand afterschool programs for kids. These are opportunities for us not simply to keep the city safer but obviously to move the city forward in a significant way. Public safety of course a big issue in this election. You said you want to hire about 200 cops. Can you do that without resolving some of these other pension differences that have existed with the union . Well, the differences will continue to persist. I know that because we simply cant continue to go the route we had gone in past years. We had built really dug a 3 billion unfunded debt and retirement obligations pensions and others. So we cant go back to the ways of the past. But it seems to me as we restore pay and as were able to accommodate the officers in other ways, for example, with incentives that can keep retirement eligible officers on board i think well be able to restore trust. Some elected officials feel that the time they have the most sort of power is at the very beginning you know when you have that honeymoon. And that that is the time for the sort of bold ideas. Are you going to be the kind of mayor with bold ideas or do you think of yourself as more of a nuts and bolts idea kind of guy . I likely wouldnt have a long honeymoon, as you mentioned we have a guided city divided cityo get to work right away. On the other hand, i have plenty of bold ideas can i hear one of them . I actually wrote a book on how well make san jose the most innovative city in the country, in fact the world, were in the Silicon Valley, we should be. Those in the area have seen Silicon Valley gravitate towards the peninsula, do you feel like youre competing in San Francisco in some ways for those jobs . Well, were not just competing with San Francisco, were competing with shanghai. This is a dplal stage were on, we need the leadership that will take san jose to the next level. I think it fundamentally will start with creating a vibrant center, Silicon Valley is the place to do that. Why do you say that . San francisco is nearing capacity, bart is nearing capacity. Muni is moving at 5 miles an hour or less through much of the city. We know that San Francisco we see it in the housing costs here. And so there needs to be an urban option in this region, certainly open a good option, as well. San jose is the largest city in the region and it is time for us to start acting like it. You mentioned bart, of course there is a hope and al plan to get bart down to San Francisco. As you know, there is talk about cutting two of the three stations between santa clara and san jose to make it more likely to get that federal money. Where do you stand onni that. Ive been pushing hard on this bart station, were going to get all the stops built. I have no desire to see it cut. I think we can do it with local financing and there are options for financing. For example, we dont need the feds to do it all for us. There is talk about the olympics in the bay area, are you all for that . As long as im not mentioning the first pitch. You mention the first pitch, how hard will you go after the as . Were all in. We know the ownership of the as are very interested in being in san jose and have been interested for many years. Obviously, this will be decided by the ninth circuit and then we expect perhaps by the u. S. Supreme court. As soon as we get the green light well move forward. So no plan to back off on the lawsuit. There is no taxpayer money going into this. This is nothing but a win for our city. Weve seen how transformative they have been from San Francisco to san jose. Were the tenth largest city and the major league team. Thank you for joining us, sam liccardo. Thank you, scott, its a pleasure. And coming up, how veterans tell their stories through tattoos. But first, an aclu report released this week examines the use of Surveillance Technology by local Law Enforcement. The report finds numerous cities and counties throughout california testing or using surveillance in many cases without informing the public. In san jose this week, Community Concerns flared over the communitys quiet purchase of a drone, leading to public input and oversight. Joining me now, nicole ozer, awe authorize of the recent report. Santa clara supervisor, joe simidian, and ben farrow, nicole, i want to start with you, what tyhow much public inp there . You know, we see cities up and down the state of california spending vast amounts of money on Technology Everything from license plate readers to facial recognition to drones as you mentioned in san jose. More than 65 million. And with little to no public debate, very little consideration of the costs and benefits. And very few policies in place to make sure that misuse does not happen. And were seeing this happen over and over, largely because a lot of local Law Enforcement is taking advantage of federal funds that are coming down. And theyre often sidestepping the normal oversight procedures that city council and board of supervisors has used for generations to make sure there is really thoughtful consideration of Community Issues and that the public knows about these issues and can speak up and voice their concerns early in the process. So weve heard a lot about the Civil Liberties concerns. Should we be using the surveillance articles at all, are the Public Safety mutually exclusive in this case . No, i dont think so, thuy, i think you can respect the public and respect their privacy at the same time. Whether it is cameras and drones i have supported all of them at various times and places but also with the caveat that we answer important questions, do we really need the data . If so who is going to have access to them . What type of safeguards will be in place. What is the difference between a mass sweep for data for lawabiding citizens as opposed to somebody that is targeted, somebody who is actually likely to be bad guys. It is not the tools that are the problem. Im a Silicon Valley guy, it is not the technology that is the problem. It is the way in which we use them and answering some of these questions the aclu very widely raises i think you have to expect there is going to be misuse and abuse. And you propose policies action . On tuesday, i ask that our board refer to matter to the appropriate committee, well start with the model ordinance that the aclu had. Well tweak it and look at other jurisdictions. It wont be what is exactly off the shelf. Every jurisdiction is different. We need to have an enforceable or ordinance, saying if and when we choose to do these, we need to know what were doing, why were doing it, we need to have the safe guards in place. I think we can do it. Deputy chief benson, with bart. Bart has wearable cameras that officers can clip onto their uniforms. You have this act now where people can take pictures and report a crime in progress, so you have various surveillance technolo technologies. Why do you feel it is important to have it . Well, there is no question that technology can serve as a force multiple eye\ ier, we done the technology at our disposal, to work on solving crimes is an absolute musthave. One only has to look at the Boston Marathon bombing or the 2005 bombing that occurred at the london transit to see the value in it. But i agree, the truth is somewhere in the middle. There needs to be some safeguards. In the end it probably will end up somewhere in the middle. And what kind of policies do you have in place surrounding the use of the technology, what types of data are collected and how long it is kept for . Well, for instance with the body worn cameras we have a policy in place to talk about when we delete information and how it can be held. As was mentioned, if there is a crime attached to it, it gets held until that investigation is over. But if it is just a casual contact with a citizen it gets deleted after a certain amount of time. And there have been studies done that show that in communities that have these technologies, there was rialto in San Bernardino county where once officers started to use cameras there was an 88 drop in complaints filed against police officers, and a 64 drop in use of force by police. So clearly these are tools that do work in a community, nicole. I think the really important thing to consider is what are the issues each community is dealing with and what will be the best measures to deal with it . You know, not every county is the same. But what weve seen is the inconsistency that is happening up and down the state. You know, communities are deploying surveillance without asking the basic questions about why are we doing this . How are we going to do it . What is it going to do for our community and how are we going to protect our Community Members from it being misused. And when we look at sort of what is happening in different cities and counties maybe there are policies in place for body cameras but then there are no policies in place for facial recognition. So what this ordinance does is make sure there is Consistent Technology across the board and the questions get asked and answered before any programs go forward. And these issues are coming up amid a back drop of much broader concerns, nsa spying, and the wall street journal had had data out regarding devices used to collect data not just from criminals but from law abiding citizens. It is not just individuals, you think one piece of data, so what, but when you pull all of the pieces together we know not only were you parked in front of the oncologist last tuesday, but the following tuesday, the following tuesday, that starts to tell us something about your health situation. But if it turns out you were parked at the race track day after day after day after day, or parked someplace you shouldnt be, or that somebody thinks you shouldnt be. If we have that license plate reader, lets say thuy, are you going to the antiwar gun show, you assemble all that data. It has the potential to be misused. So i think all of us would say hey, the potential uses are great and all of us want to catch the bad guys and we all want to deter crime but we want to do it in a way that is respectful to a persons personal privacy. When you put the risk in it, you paint a big picture for somebodys life. And if it keep it forever the risk of abuse goes up dramatically. Give us specifics, you would like to see legislation around this. What specific proposals would you like to see in place . How long should data be kept . You know, when i was in state senate i had a bill that said data from the license plate readers ought to be purged after six months. I couldnt get the bill off the senate floor . Why not . Well, because we got pushed back from Law Enforcement as well as the private sector because these people wanted to use the data forever. I kept saying look, surely there, a compromise between six months and forever . Cant we find a time . If you dont keep the data you contact misuse it or abuse it. For me, one of the starting points, collect only what you truly need. Know that you have a purpose. Dont collect it just because you can and purge it after some reasonable period of time. If we can collect it all, collect it all. I think those are two mind sets that need to be addressed pretty directly. Were dealing with incredibly invasive technologies here. Were talking about things like sting rays that can actually track cell phones of just not one individual that the police may be targeting but actually hundreds of thousands of phones of innocent people that might be in the vicinity. Sting rays are a primary example of cities and counties that have quietly been purchasing without the public knowing, often policymakers not knowing and even keeping it secret from judges. Were dealing with technology that is being purchased and deployed and has a real impact on the Civil Liberties and civil rights of californians. And there just needs to be basic transparency and accountability for the uses. Do you think the technologies are achieving the uses that you want . And are there aggressive efforts to analyze that and make sure that there are not unintended consequences . Well, again, no doubt that it is achieving its goals. It is helping us, bart has had video on its system since its inception. So bart has used video to solve many a crime in this system. The cameras that our personnel are currently wearing have helped hugely when it comes to not only crimes showing what happened from the officers viewpoint, but also helping with the misconduct. Showing how the officer acted. No doubt about it, it is working. Well have to let you have the last word on that. Unfortunately were out of time here, but thank you very much to all of you. Bart Deputy Police chief, nicole azer with aclu and also Santa Clara County supervisor, thank you all. This week as we honored our nations military men and women for veterans day, a new experience highlighted the experience of veterans through their tattoos. The online exhibit featured 24 vets and their war ink. This is an unusual way to bring home the stories of returning military service members. Scott schafer spoke to the curator and one of the vets earlier. First, a clip from an exhibit video. There have been a lot of chances to talk about the war in afghanistan, but i dont think there was a lot of chance to talk about what these experiences were in their own voice in a way that doesnt have a politically charged message. People always want to know when they ask you about your experiences and stuff like that, i started to think of tattoos as a way to tell the stories. So i got a soldiers cross tattooed on my back for my friends that died because i carried the burden of survivors guilt. Joining me now to talk about the war ink exhibit are u. S. Army veteran zach bass, and chris brown, Contra Costa County seniors representative. What is a nice librarian like you doing launching a project like tattoos . Well, scott, libraries connect us with stories and stories help us make sense of our world and who we are as a nation. And we believe that our veterans and the stories that they have, that they bring back home with them are important to tell and to connect to. And zacariah, what is it about tattoos that make it such a good vehicle for you to tell the stories . Sometimes the story that is we have that we piece together, and other life stories that we create are not always easily articulated. And sometimes we need a medium or an outlet to put those into. And it could be other art forms, too, but in this case, tattoos. What kind of reaction are you hearing from veterans and the public about this . I think from veterans themselves, we were surprised by how much it has meant to them. So a lot of the feedback has been you know, thank you for you know, getting inspired again. You know, they really get into the fact that theyre able to share their stories. But it is not just any story about their service. It is a story that they have decided to put on their own skin. It is something that is very personal to them. We have a clip with us, a few of the veterans talking. Lets take a look and then well come back and talk about it. It is a tribute to those that are no longer here. But it also serves as a reminder to maintain humanity. And the experiences that ive been through, where i am now. And how that is going to shape who i become in the future. Yeah, people are very quick to judge when they hear military tattoos, which is a shame. Helps the civilian world kind of understand a little bit more about it. That we have thought processes behind their tattoos, behind what we do. Zacariah, you have some great tats on your forearms, can you tell us what they mean to you . This is an angel, and wrapped in her wings is the american flag. And in the flag is the names of men that i have worked with that are no longer here. And at the base of it are demon, and for me, the whole tattoo represents the battle, the struggle that goes on in my head between remembering the really awesome and beautiful things that came out of the camaraderie that was built. And the intensive effort of burying friends. And you know just losing them, that sense of loss. I would see how it would be a double edged sword, you never want to forget your buddies. On the other hand, in a sense you want to transition into civilian life. Do you ever worry that the tattoos will keep you in the military, in a sense . No, i chose not to get any tattoos that i would have to see every day until i was ready, to be at a