In a bid to increase oversight of the NYPD's efforts to spy on New Yorkers, City Council Members Vanessa L. Gibson and Dan Garodnick on Wednesday introduced a new bill that would require the department to seek public input before rolling out new surveillance technologies.

The Public Oversight of Surveillance Technology Act would mandate that the NYPD publicly announce plans to acquire and deploy new surveillance technologies and publish proposed usage and impact policies for these technologies. These draft proposals would include descriptions of health and safety risks posed by surveillance tools, training requirements for usage, and planned oversight mechanisms.

The public would have a 45-day window to comment on these proposals, after which the police commissioner would issue a final use and impact policy. The act would also require the NYPD to share information about its data security protocols.

"It forces the NYPD to actually think about privacy before they jump into new surveillance schemes," Garodnick said of the bill. He said he believed it would give the public the opportunity to "meaningfully engage" with the NYPD's plans to acquire and deploy new technologies.

Last February, the NYCLU revealed that for years, the NYPD had secretly been deploying StingRays, portable surveillance devices that act as imitation cell phone towers, enabling a user to collect data from nearby cellular devices. StingRays make it possible to pinpoint cell phone user locations and metadata on their calls or text messaging; some can also be used to intercept these conversations.

At the time, the NYCLU reported that the NYPD had used StingRays on more than 1,000 occasions dating back to 2008 and that the department had no written policy for its use of the devices. It further found that rather than seeking warrants, which require probable cause, the NYPD filed for so-called "pen-register orders," court orders that require the lower legal standard of reasonable suspicion.

"New Yorkers shouldn't have to wait for the NYPD to be dragged into court before they learn basic information about invasive technology the department uses to spy on people," NYCLU senior staff attorney Mariko Hirose stated in a press release issued by the organization. "This bill represents an important way to increase transparency and hold the NYPD accountable."

The proposed bill comes as the Trump administration moves to drastically ramp-up deportations of undocumented immigrants, as well as certain non-citizen Americans. There is widespread concern among immigrant and immigrant advocates about information collected by the NYPD winding up in the hands of federal immigration authorities. While New York's "sanctuary city" policies generally prohibit police from sharing information with the federal government, once collected, any data in theory could be subpoenaed by the feds.

The bill would require the NYPD to disclose any plans to share data collected with surveillance technologies with other entities. It would also require the department to provide information about data security protections.

The bill would not require the NYPD to disclose specific details about the use of covered technologies in surveillance operations, such as exactly when and where a technology would be deployed.

For surveillance technologies currently being deployed, the bill would require the NYPD to issue draft use and impact statements within 180 days of passage.

Civil libertarians have long sparred with the NYPD over its surveillance practices. Over the past few years, the NYCLU has uncovered the NYPD's secret use of a range of surveillance technologies, including mobile x-ray units that can see inside vehicles and buildings and a national license plate reader database that enables it to track New Yorkers' cars around the country.

The NYPD is currently in settlement talks with the NYCLU and a group of Muslim New Yorkers over litigation alleging pervasive illegal blanket surveillance of Muslims and activists. This fall, a judge rejected a proposed settlement of the litigation, finding it imposed insufficient oversight to ensure the department would comply with rules governing surveillance of political groups.

"This matters to Muslim New Yorkers who've been subjected to a high level of police surveillance," Garodnick told Gothamist. "It matters to other historically marginalized groups who historically have been subject to high levels of surveillance. And it matters to civilians who want to understand what the police department is doing in their name."

At a press conference Wednesday afternoon, NYPD Commissioner for Legal Matters Larry Byrne reportedly attacked the bill as a gift to terrorists.

#NYPD’s Larry Byrne goes further, saying it "if we had to comply w/ this bill ... Inspire Magazine" would be dedicated to it cc @mirandan247 — Azi (@Azi) March 1, 2017

Garodnick expressed incredulity at the statement. "The NYPD does not have to interpret every transparency initiative as an act of war," he said.

The NYPD did not respond to Gothamist's request for comment on the legislation.