r.,1Nures EXHIBIT  * B
Port Commls. Glon B.ujul,
rl.ootlng of ftbCtr!'4(:,'. 'AS,O,lo
February 25, 2020

Dear Commissioners,
I want to start off by saying that I was very encouraged in December to hear Port
Commissioners calling for greater transparency and accountability in response to decisions
being made about the use of facial recognition technology at SeaTac Airport.
At that meeting, Puget Sound Sage came to comment with a dozen others, and nearly 30 public
comments were sent by email overwhelmingly opposed to any introduction of facial
recognition technology at the Port. We urged you to defer action on a Resolution or Motion
until you had fully heard from civil liberties and data surveillance experts, as well as
communities most impacted by the use of unregulated technology at our Port. Instead,
Commissioners moved forward with a slightly amended Motion which directed further analysis
and policy development to an Internal workgroup with little to no accountability to the public.
While it is early to completely evaluate the Port's process for establishing guidelines for the use
of biometrics, what we have seen so far is deeply concerning. A Biometrics External Advisory
Group established in response to the public's concerns around lack of transparency and
accountability has been overwhelmingly stacked with industry and agency representatives that
have already expressed their interest in having facialrecognition at the Port. In fact, two
corporations that stand to profit directly from this decision, Microsoft and Amazon, have seats
at the table. These two corporations are not obvious stakeholders at the Port AND they have a
track record of lobbying in opposition to strong privacy regulations around surveillance
technology. It's hard to see how the four public interest organizations serving on the External
Advisory Group can effectively influence the Port's decision-making in this setting.
While we appreciate noticeable efforts by Port staff to improve transparency of the Biometrics
Work Groups' activities through the website and updates at Commission meetings, it appears to
be window dressing while plans for facialrecognition move forward. For example, Port staff
posting an RFP for Facial Recognition equipment in SeaTac's International Departures terminal
before the Biometrics Workgroup has even proposed guidelines seems like business as usual.
To date, the impact of biometrics on communities of color, immigrants and refugees has not
been fully explored, and you still have not received substantive feedback from the public on this
issue. As such, we urge you to withdraw the RFP and not allow any further action by Port
officials to lay the groundwork for facial recognition until you hold a robust public hearing
dedicated to the issue of biometrics to test assumptions being made by proponents of the
technology.

As we commented last time, SeaTac Airport is a critical resource to the region, to all of our
communities, and to individuals who need air travel for work and family. Use of biometric
technology, however, is not critical to anyone. We know that you as individual Commissioners
care deeply about this issue and feel obligated to protect the public. We are asking you today
to back up your commitments from the last meeting and help the public achieve clarity about
what the Commission is moving forward and what you are not.
Sincerely,
Elena Perez
Organizing Director, Puget Sound Sage