A COMMUNICATION TRANSMITTED FROM YI-AN HUANG, CITY MANAGER, RELATIVE TO THE 2025 ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT CONCERNING CITY DEPARTMENTS’ USE OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY OR SURVEILLANCE DATA.

1. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Cambridge Arts Division or Unit (if applicable): Marketing & Communications Submitted by: Jason Weeks Date: 02/04/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Media Monitoring – Media Monitoring – AgilityPR • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social Social 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Media Monitoring - AgilityPR: AgilityPR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors media channels and digital/print media platforms to identify relevant content based on keyword search terms. The platform provides access to a media contacts database, and is used to distribute city media releases. AgilityPRis also used to monitor coverage of the City of Cambridge and key topic areas of interest (i.e. sustainability, construction, transportation, and Visionzero) to compile reports to share with internal staff. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows the City to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, responding to messages, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • No. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No.

5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Media Monitoring – AgiltyPR: This technology allows the City to respond to media reports regarding the City of Cambridge in a timely and appropriate manner and ensure the City’s brand is appropriately represented. The platform allows us to measure the impact of our media outreach efforts and adjust strategy to improve coverage. The tool provides us with access to journalist and media outlet contacts from across the nation. The tool centralizes communication efforts that takes place by communications staff integrated throughout various city departments. It allows for centralized monitoring and coordination of citywide efforts. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: This tool allows City departments to better coordinate social media efforts in terms of content reaction, strategy evaluation, and responsiveness to our followers. Not all departments have migrated into the tool yet but will in the coming years. The advantage of this tool is that all our social platforms can be accessed within one account, that is secured by various permission levels. It allows for quick access and control of City social media accounts during an emergency situation and provides a way for the city to coordinate the dissemination of information to the public. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • AgilityPR: Costs covered by annual subscription cost, which is paid centrally via the OOM account within the City’s Public Information Office annual budget. • Sprout Social: Costs covered by annual subscription cost, which is paid centrally via the OOM account within the City’s Public Information Office annual budget. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • Cambridge Arts is not aware of any marginalization as an impact to this usage.

2. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Community Development Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Melissa Peters Date: 02/24/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Media Monitoring - AgilityPR • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Media Monitoring - Agility PR: Agility PR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors media channels and social media platforms to identify relevant content based on keyword search terms. The platform provides access to a media influencers (media contacts) database, and is used to distribute city media releases. Agility PR is also used to monitor coverage of the City of Cambridge and key topic areas of interest (i.e. sustainability, construction, transportation, and Visionzero) to compile weekly reports to share with internal staff. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social): Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows the City to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, responding to messages, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • No 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No

5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Sprout Social has helped CDD to effectively manage requests coming in from the public via social media and to schedule our posts in one location instead of logging into each platform separately; combined these activities reflect dozens of actions each month. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • CDD uses the City-wide subscription via access provided by the City’s Communications Director. Annual subscription costs are paid centrally via the OOM account within the City’s Public Information Office annual budget. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • CDD is not aware of any disproportionate impact.

4. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Community Safety Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Marie Mathieu Date: February 4, 2026 Surveillance Technology: Operations/Case Management Software - Microsoft Forms, Microsoft Excel, Julota 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Microsoft Forms, Microsoft Excel Upon launch of 911 Response operations in July 2024, the Community Safety Department (CSD) used Microsoft Forms and Microsoft Excel applications as an interim method to collect and store information about the services and interventions provided by the CARE (Community Assistance, Engagement and Response) Team. For each encounter, the CARE Team collected and recorded basic demographic data, service needs identified by community members, referrals made, and any follow up plans. Additionally, the CARE Team used Microsoft Forms and Microsoft Excel for case management support to keep track of ongoing services provided and where responders made referrals. This software served as interim data collection software until June 2025, while the case management software was procured, developed, and implemented. • Julota Upon the implementation of Julota, the new case management software, the Microsoft collection was discontinued and data was transferred to the Julota system. As of July 2025, the CSD has utilized Julota entirely for the same purposes as stated above, leveraging a technology used by similar alternative response programs across the country to enter, monitor, and securely manage data entered related to crisis response and follow-up care. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? Not without written consent from the community member 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None to our knowledge 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose?

Yes 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? Julota cost - $37,040 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology No

4. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Human Service Programs Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Joseph Corazzini Date: 02/12/2026 Surveillance Technology: • IP Address Collection Platforms • Media Monitoring - Agility PR • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • IP Address Collection Platforms (Drupal Community – Drupal 10Apache Software Foundation; Apache HTTP Server; Oomph LLC – Find It Cambridge website software): Drupal Apache Software/Server by Drupal/Oomph is the platform on which the Find It Cambridge website is built and housed on. A feature of this platform is the ability to log the IP addresses of those who visit the website. Media Monitoring – Agility PR Solutions: AgilityPR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors the City’s media coverage . The platform provides access to a media contacts database and is used to distribute department media releases. Agility PR is also used to monitor print and digital media coverage about the City of Cambridge, including key topic areas of interest to support strategic media outreach. This software is managed by the Communications Department. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that the department uses to schedule social media department and City channels and monitor engagement analytics. This software is managed by the Communications Department and supports a more coordinated and strategic citywide social media strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • No 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology?

• None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • IP Address Collection Platform. The Find It Cambridge website continues to be a fantastic resourcee for those seeking information about services across the city, and is currently maintaining its levels of hosting, over 1,400 contacts, organizations, programs,and event listings housed on the site. The Drupal platform allows us to give service providers the ability to easily share opportunities on social media platforms as requested, which increases traffic to the site and engagement with the Find It platform. It also allows service providers to receive the pageview count for their pages to increase their engagement and encourage them to update or improve their content regularly. • Agility PR. This technology continues to allow DHSP to respond to media reports regarding the City of Cambridge in a timely and appropriate manner and ensure the City’s brand is appropriately represented. The platform allows us to measure the impact of our media outreach efforts and adjust strategy to improve coverage. The tool provides us with access to journalist and media outlet contacts from across the nation. The platform has enabled DHSP’s Communications Manager to send press releases and track PR engagement. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social. Over the past year, DHSP has used Sprout Social for social media management and media monitoring. The Sprout Social platform is used for scheduling and monitoring posts on DHSP’s Twitter and Facebook feeds. It also allows staff to generate social media reports to track engagement and use a data-driven approach for the department’s social media strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for better coordination between DHSP and other City departments. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology?

• IP Address Collection Platform – Oomph - $67,914 maintenance contract from OOM from DHSP Budget, FY26 • Agility PR - Costs covered by City-wide annual subscription cost from OOM from Public Information Office budget. • Sprout Social - Costs covered by City-wide annual subscription cost from OOM from Public Information Office budget. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • DHSP is not aware of any.

5. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Election Commission Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Tanya L. Ford Date: 02/24/2026 Surveillance Technology: Electronic Poll Pads 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Electronic poll pads were used by poll workers at early voting sites in 2024 to check in voters. They were used for the March 2024, Presidential Primary, the September 2024, State Primary and the November 2024, Presidential Election to lookup voters. The pads are used by authorized Election Commission personnel to identify voters and confirm that they have voted. The pads do not collect identifiable information related to how a person voted, only that they voted. The information in the poll pad is the information in the state’s Voter Registration Information System (VRIS): voter name, address, party, date of birth, and ballot cast or not. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • The data is stored on the state’s VRIS, which is supplied to the Election Commission by the Office of the Sec. of the Commonwealth. • Only Election Commission personnel can access the information stored by the poll pads. The poll pads are password protected. The information in the poll pads is the information on VRIS: voter name, address, party, date of birth, and ballot cast or not. • The information on the poll pads and stored in VRIS is a public record. The information in the poll pads is the information on VRIS: voter name, address, party, date of birth, and ballot cast or not. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • No complaints received by the Election Commission office. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No violations 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • The technology was effective. Without the pads poll workers would have had to check in voters via paper “Voter Lists” return the marked “Voter Lists” to the Election

Commission office at the end of the day/night during the early voting period and the Election Commission staff would have been required to input by hand all the voter data collected during the week or weeks of early voting into the state’s Voter Registration Information System. Using poll pads cut down on a tremendous amount of staff time. At the end of each day the staff simply downloaded the information from the poll pads and uploaded it to VRIS. On Election Day the poll pads are used to help some voters find their correct ward & precinct and polling location. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Costs - There a total of 39 poll pads. All 39 poll pads will enter a new annual agreement in the amount of $11,700 to be paid to the vendor. This breaks down to $300 per poll pad. • Funding Source – FY25State Primary operating budget. • Personnel costs - The use of poll pads does not impact staff or poll workers’ pay. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • No impact. Poll pads were supplied for use at each of the 3 early voting sites. Cambridge Voters were permitted to vote early at any one of the sites during the early voting period. Weekdays, evenings and a weekend were made available to all Cambridge voters.

6. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Emergency Communications Division or Unit (if applicable): Emergency Communications Center Submitted by: Christina Giacobbe Date: February 12, 2026 Surveillance Technology: • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System • Digital Evidence Management System • Landline Location Technology 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System (RapidSOS). RapidSOS is a web platform that provides life-saving data directly to 911 and first responders in an emergency, providing faster, more effective responses. In Cambridge, when callers contact 911 their call is directed to Emergency Communications on the state’s Next Generation 911 platform and RapidSOS provides secondary, data-based location information to ECC through the RapidSOS clearinghouse. The purpose of this technology is to provide ECC Call Takers and Dispatchers with an accurate phone number and location information of wireless callers who contact 911 in our jurisdiction. • Digital Evidence Management System. Digital Evidence is a software platform system similar to a document management solution as a platform that supports repository of current collected public safety records such as 911 calls, Police Record Management System (RMS), Evidence, Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and other evidence forms such as photos and other media. • Landline Location Technology. Landline Location Technology is deployed to identify the location of the caller during an emergency. The information obtained is the address, floor, office number and/or office/agency name for business lines (landline office phones) in the City of Cambridge. It does not cover residential properties or other phone listings as this is for the City of Cambridge business lines (landlines) only. This information is provided to the 911 operators directly and first responders during an emergency, providing faster, more effective responses. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System (RapidSOS). The information obtained through this platform is not shared with any third party as the information is

presented in real time. The department does share caller information and audio calls with the Police Department and District Attorney’s Office as they proceed with prosecution. However, this information is provided through our 911 system, not RapidSOS. • Digital Evidence Management System. The information obtained through this platform is shared with authorized law enforcement agencies for prosecutorial purposes on behalf of the City of Cambridge. The department does not share evidence stored with any external non-government agency. • Landline Location Technology. The information obtained utilizing this technology is not shared with any third party as the information is presented in real time for emergency service response with the City of Cambridge Offices. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? No 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System (RapidSOS). Yes. RapidSOS technology platform has been effective in providing location information during emergency calls for service. The RapidSOS platform continues to enhance capabilities in aiding in emergency responses with mapping capabilities and alerts. • Digital Evidence Management System. The department has implemented the Digital Evidence Management System and has conducted trainings with employees who will be utilizing the system. The design and implementation of the system have met our expectations thus far and has improved efficiency and productivity in sharing enforcement data with privileged users • Landline Location Technology. Yes, the technology has been effective in providing location information during emergency calls for service. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology?

• • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System (RapidSOS). No, the department has not had any public records request. • Digital Evidence Management System. No, the department has not had any public records requests. • Landline Location Technology. No, the department has not had any public records request. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System (RapidSOS). The department does not pay for any services related to this technology, as the platform operates within the State 911, Next Generation 911 system. There is no cost to Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP). • Digital Evidence Management System. The department incurs an annual cost of $141,720.00 for this subscription-based service. Based on our continued efforts of evidence collection and timeline for prosecution, the department’s annual costs may increase due to storage needs in future years. • Landline Location Technology. The department incurs an annual cost of $18,000.00 per year for location services for city owned landlines, which are provided through a State 911 authorized vendor. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • RapidSOS Emergency Data Integration System (RapidSOS). The department does not know of any communities disproportionately impacted by RapidSOS as callers who contact 911 are doing so voluntarily to seek emergency services. When callers do contact 911, all calls are processed according to policy and protocol. • Digital Evidence Management System. The department does not know of any communities disproportionately impacted by Digital Evidence Management System. The system is utilized to record digital evidence for crimes reported, 911 calls made, or media related to prosecution. • Landline Location Technology. The department does not know of any communities disproportionately impacted by using this Landline Location Technology. Callers who contact 911 are doing so voluntarily to seek emergency services even when utilizing a

City of Cambridge business line (landline). When callers do contact 911, all calls are processed according to policy and protocol.

7. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Emergency Communications Division or Unit (if applicable): Police Submitted by: Christina Giacobbe Date: February 24, 2026 Surveillance Technology: Trespass Tracking Database 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Trespass Tracking Database - Information about no trespassing notices and letters provided to individuals who receive a no trespass order under Massachusetts law are recorded in the Trespass Tracking database. The Police Department is required to maintain these notices. All notices and the information in the notice are recorded in our Trespass Tracking database so that the information can be made readily available to first responders during calls for service. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? The information maintained in the Trespass Tracking is not shared with external parties. This information is shared with Cambridge Police to protect property and public safety and to hold those accountable who violate the orders. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? The Trespass Tracking database has been effective as it maintains up to date records of active Trespass Orders as well as safeguards those locations to increase public safety and quality of life. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? There have been no requests made to ECD for this information as it relates to the number of Trespass Orders or individuals in the database.

7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? There is no cost for having the database as it is part of our Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) platform. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? The department does not know of any communities that are disproportionately impacted by the Trespass Tracking database. Individuals are warned prior to being issued a no trespass order. The Police Department provides notice and will notify the ECC in the event a Trespass Order is issued so Emergency Communications can maintain the database as part of our role in supporting them.

8. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Executive/City Manager Division or Unit (if applicable): Communications and Community Engagement Office Submitted by: Lee Gianetti Date: 02/25/2026 Surveillance Technology: • – Media Monitoring – AgilityPR • Media Monitoring – AgilityPRSocial Media Monitoring - Sprout Social 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Media Monitoring - AgilityPR: AgilityPR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors media channels and digital/print media platforms to identify relevant content based on keyword search terms. The platform provides access to a media contacts database, and is used to distribute city media releases. AgilityPRis also used to monitor coverage of the City of Cambridge and key topic areas of interest (i.e. sustainability, construction, transportation, and Visionzero) to compile reports to share with internal staff. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows the City to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, responding to messages, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • No 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No

5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Media Monitoring – AgiltyPR: This technology allows the City to respond to media reports regarding the City of Cambridge in a timely and appropriate manner and ensure the City’s brand is appropriately represented. The platform allows us to measure the impact of our media outreach efforts and adjust strategy to improve coverage. The tool provides us with access to journalist and media outlet contacts from across the nation. The tool centralizes communication efforts that takes place by communications staff integrated throughout various city departments. It allows for centralized monitoring and coordination of citywide efforts. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: This tool allows City departments to better coordinate social media efforts in terms of content reaction, strategy evaluation, and responsiveness to our followers. Not all departments have migrated into the tool yet but will in the coming years. The advantage of this tool is that all our social platforms can be accessed within one account, that is secured by various permission levels. It allows for quick access and control of City social media accounts during an emergency situation and provides a way for the city to coordinate the dissemination of information to the public. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • The Communications and Community Engagement Office did not directly receive any public records requests. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • AgilityPR via SHI- $37,310.40 annual subscription cost from OOM from Communications and Community Engagement Office budget. • Sprout Social Via SHI - $48,683.25 annual subscription cost from OOM from Communications and Community Engagement Office Office budget. • 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • The Communictations and Community Engagement Office is not aware of any.

9. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Finance Division or Unit (if applicable): Assessing Submitted by: Gayle Willett Date: February 24, 2026 Surveillance Technology: • Atlas RMV Portal • MUNIS Tax Modules, MA Environmental Police Registration • LexisNexis 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • The Atlas RMV Portal. This is a web application provided by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to access the RMV system. The RMV requires municipalities to use the ATLAS portal for accessing dealer plate information needed for excise tax billing. Assessing has limited access to this database and only uses it to create excise tax bills for billing car dealerships with dealer plates in Cambridge. • MUNIS Tax Modules, MA Environmental Police Registration: The software suite contains several tax modules (Real Estate, Personal Property, MV Excise, and Boat). The software processes files in order to generate excise tax bills using registration numbers in the case of the MV Excise and Boat modules. Access to the MA environmental police registration database will allow the vetting of duplicate and expired file information to ensure that the bills that are generated are correct and valid. • LexisNexis: Assessing uses LexisNexis to review information submitted by taxpayers for residential exemptions and personal exemptions. This data allows the Assessing department to vet information received by taxpayers to prevent fraud and ensure that regular audits are conducted. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? No. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year?

None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Atlas RMV Portal: Yes. Assessing will continue to send out dealer plate excise tax bills. • MUNIS Tax Modules, MA Environmental Police Registration: Yes. • LexisNexis: Yes. LexisNexis is being used to review information submitted by taxpayers for residential exemptions and personal exemptions. This data allows the Assessing department to vet information received by taxpayers to prevent fraud and ensure that regular audits are conducted. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? No. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Atlas RMV Portal: All costs associated with Assessing’s use for dealer plates billing are covered by the RMV. • MUNIS Tax Modules, MA Environmental Police Registration: All costs associated with Assessing’s use of the Environmental police database is covered by the state. • LexisNexis: $240.00 per year. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? The department does not know of any communities disproportionately impacted by its surveillance technology. • Atlas RMV Portal & MUNIS Tax Modules, MA Environmental Police Registration: Please note that the technology is only used to search and verify information about car dealerships and boat owners. The portals provide information that is not available to the public regarding the number of dealer plates at any dealership in Cambridge and boat owner information, including: boat type, boat age, boat manufacturer, boat length, status of registration and expiration date for registration. The Assessing department has limited access to these databases to three members of the department and has requested the least amount of information required for sending out dealer plate excise tax bills and boat excise tax bills.

• LexisNexis: LexisNexis monitors our office’s use to ensure that it is only used for office purposes and has the ability to audit our use and can terminate our contract for misuse.

10. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Finance Division or Unit (if applicable): Revenue Submitted by: Michele Kincaid, Angela Brathwaite, Aristides Evora Date: February 24, 2026 Surveillance Technology: • ATLAS RMV Portal • MUNIS Tax Modules 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • ATLAS RMV Portal. Used by select Finance Staff to release Non-Renewal holds at the Registry of Motor Vehicles on behalf of taxpayers who have paid their delinquent Motor Vehicle Excise tax bills. • MUNIS Tax Modules. Used by Finance Department to create Excise, Real Estate, Personal Property, and Water Bills. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • ATLAS RMV Portal. The ATLAS Database is used by the Registry of Motor Vehicles and Municipalities within the Commonwealth. Other Municipalities are able to view a Cambridge taxpayer’s information, should that taxpayer contact them. For example, upon logging in to the ATLAS Database, Cambridge Staff would be able to see that a customer not only has delinquent Motor Vehicle Excise bills in Cambridge, but also delinquent parking tickets from Belmont. There is no ability for City Staff to modify a record filed under a different Municipality, or vice versa. • MUNIS Tax Modules. The data is shared with our bill printers. The City produces approximately: 50,000 Real Estate bills, 55,000 Excise Tax bills, 2,500 Property Tax bills, and 65,000 Water bills annually. It is unrealistic for us to print this volume of bills in house, so we use third party printing services. For Water we use Kirkwood Printing and for Real Estate/Personal Property/Excise we use PKS – Deputy Collector. From the Munis software we generate a flat file for the necessary bill type and send that securely to our printers. Our printers are then able to produce the bills included in the flat file and mail them on our behalf.

Kirkwood Printing and PKS – Deputy Collector work with multiple municipalities in the Greater Boston Area. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • ATLAS RMV Portal. Extremely effective. The ATLAS Database is an upgrade from the previous ALARS Database (both provided to Municipalities through the Registry of Motor Vehicles). The ATLAS Database offers a user-friendly platform that allows City Staff to provide taxpayers with an accurate view of their driver profile. We can alert taxpayers to delinquent bills in other Municipalities that they may not have been aware of. • MUNIS Tax Modules. Yes. Munis Tax Modules are an effective way for the City to bill its residents and bring in revenue via Water, Excise, Real Estate, and Personal Property. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • ATLAS RMV Portal. The City is assessed RMV Fees on the Cherry Sheet Assessments. There are no personnel costs associated. The current Massachusetts Statutes authorize the Non-Renew program to charge an RMV Surcharge of $20.00 per each clear transaction we make through the ATLAS Database. The cost of this Surcharge is built into the fees that are incurred on delinquent bills. During the past year there were no costs associated with upgrading, training users, or maintaining the ATLAS Database. • MUNIS Tax Modules. The current contract for MUNIS is $133,795,70 for Fiscal Year 2026.

8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • ATLAS RMV Portal. All drivers within the Commonwealth are subject to Excise tax, however we can infer that under-privileged economic groups will have more trouble paying this tax each year and therefore are more likely to have delinquencies with holds on their accounts. These holds will result in increased interaction with our Department. Transient individuals will also be subject to a heightened privacy impact. Students moving to and from the City between semesters, and other individuals coming and going, may lose track of where their vehicle is registered and may not receive their bill to pay it on time. The Finance Department tries to be understanding of people financial situations, and we do offer payment plans on a case-by-case basis if a taxpayer is in need. The Finance Department does not keep any additional data on which taxpayers are on hold or delinquent, aside from the amount of the outstanding bills. We do not maintain records of personally identifying information regarding taxpayers who make payments or do not make payments. • MUNIS Tax Modules. Munis Tax Modules maintain information on any individual with a vehicle registered in the City, any individual who owns a home or a business in the City, and any individual who pays water bills for a property in the City. This encompasses a great number of people. The Finance Department does not categorize this data into individual sub-categories. All City Residents are equally represented in the Munis system.

11. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Fire Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Acting Chief Thomas Cahill Date: 02/11/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Laryngoscopes • Social Media Monitoring - Meltwater Engage (Powered by Sprout Social) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Laryngoscopes: The GlideScope Video Laryngoscopes were put into service during 2021. The GlideScope Video Laryngoscope is a lifesaving tool for paramedics to use in the pre-hospital setting. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows the City to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, responding to messages, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? No 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? No complaints 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? No violations 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Laryngoscopes: It has been used several times weekly in emergency situations. The video capabilities are limited to live view only. We have removed the SD card so no images are saved or transmitted.

• Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: This tool has allowed the Fire Department to coordinate social media efforts across various platforms in terms of information dissemination regarding public safety, current events, and public relations, as well as receiving feedback. This technology allows us to answer questions and provide related safety information in a timely manner. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? No public record requests received. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Laryngoscopes: $2,250 was spent on accessories for the units. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: No cost to FD, cost covered by annual subscription cost paid centrally by the City PIO Office. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • Laryngoscopes: No. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: No.

12. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Information Technology Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Mike Dugas Date: 02/15/2026 Surveillance Technology: IP Address Collection Platforms (Multiple) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • IP address collection platforms. The City of Cambridge uses various platforms that collect IP addresses from internal and external network and internet connections and connection attempts, e.g., the City website, Find It Cambridge, the City firewall and the City’s web servers. While the platforms vary, the surveillance capabilities and functionality are the same. IP address information is used to limit and protect the City network from malicious sites and unauthorized access. • The city logs IP addresses on these technologies to aid in data protection, website performance, and relevancy of content and services to users. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? No. This data is not shared with any third parties. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? No complaints have been received about IP collection. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? No. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? Yes. The City firewall and web servers, and the IP collection through the City’s websites have been effective. • The Cambridge firewall is achieving its identified purpose. Currently we block: o about 1.5 Million overall events per day; o 100-200 critical events daily; and o 10-25 anti-bot events daily. o If the firewall misses a malicious IP, the logs on web servers are critical to diagnose site performance on a security perspective.

• The City of Cambridge collects information about visitors to public websites. This information has been leveraged to help better manage the sites. We have used this information to learn how many visitors we have, the websites they are coming from, which parts of our web site are of most interest to users and other facts that inform how ITD continuously improves the City’s website and online services. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? No. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Firewall o $20,000 ongoing training o $90,000 annual maintenance • Website(s) o Hosted on a Virtual Host which contains many servers, making a cost estimate difficult to pinpoint. Estimate $60,000 annual cost. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? No. The IP address collection platforms, through the City’s firewall and website(s), automatically operate on industry standard methodologies. They impact all individuals attempting to access the City’s websites in the same way.

13. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Law Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Megan B. Bayer Date: 02/26/26 Surveillance Technology: WestLaw Public Records Search function 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • WestLaw Public Records Search function. This is a subscription service that is a part of WestLaw which allows users to search and gather information from various public records. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • In circumstances where there are technical difficulties with the software, the vendor, rather than the attorney, performs the search and provides the report. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Yes. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology?

• The WestLaw subscription total cost is not broken down by feature. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • No. This technology is only used on an as-needed basis to search public records for filings or documents to be used in legal proceedings.

14. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Library Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Maria McCauley Date: 2/24/25 Surveillance Technology: • Media Monitoring – AgilityPR • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social • Social Work Case Management Software- CharityTracker from Simon Solutions • Patron Incident Tracking System (PITS) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Media Monitoring – AgilityPR: AgilityPR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors media channels and social media platforms to identify relevant content based on keyword search terms. The platform provides access to a media contacts database, and is used to distribute city media releases. AgilityPR is also used to monitor coverage of the City of Cambridge and key topic areas of interest (i.e. the Library). The Library primarily uses this service to distribute press releases and media advisories • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows the City to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, responding to messages, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. The Library is not actively using these features at this time. • Social Work Case Management Software- CharityTracker from Simon Solutions: This cloud-based, HIPAA compliant software allows the Library Social Worker and social work interns to track client and case information for patrons who request social work services. • Patron Incident Tracking Software: PITS from Quipu is a hosted, web-based application that allows Library staff to log and track patron-involved Library incidents. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • Media Monitoring – AgilityPR: No surveillance data from AgilityPR has been shared with a third-party. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: No surveillance data from Sprout Social has been shared with a third-party.

• Social Work Case Management Software- CharityTracker from Simon Solutions: CharityTracker does not share data with any external third parties. • Patron Incident Tracking Software: No surveillance data from Quipu has been shared with a third-party. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None • 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None • 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Media Monitoring – AgilityPR: The Library primarily uses AgilityPR to distribute press releases and media advisories. It has provided helpful efficiencies and flexibility to reach different outreach lists. From March 1, 2025, to February 13, 2026, the Library distributed 29 press releases and media advisories to promote library news, programs, and services. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: This tool allows the Library to better coordinate social media efforts in terms of content reaction, strategy evaluation, and responsiveness to our followers. The advantage of this tool is that all our social platforms can be accessed within one account, that is secured by various permission levels. It allows for quick access and control of City social media accounts during an emergency situation and provides a way for the city to coordinate the dissemination of information to the public. • Social Work Case Management Software- CharityTracker from Simon Solutions:. Use of this technology has allowed the Library social worker and social work interns to record client data, including clinical or case management notes, to better serve Library patrons in need of social services. The database employs 256-bit SSL encryption, is HIPAA-compliant, and is password protected. • Patron Incident Tracking Software: This tool allows Library staff to securely track information about behavior policy violations and patron discipline. It has been used to report 374 patron behavior incidents from March 1, 2025 to February 13, 2026. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology?

• The Library did not receive any public records requests concerning this technology. • 7. How much did it cost to acquire and operate Surveillance Technology? • Media Monitoring - AgilityPR: The Library uses the City-wide subscription via access provided by the Public Information Office. • Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: The Library uses the City-wide subscription via access provided by the Public Information Office. • Social Work Case Management Software- CharityTracker from Simon Solutions: The annual licensing fee for the software is $1,440 which is paid for using the Library’s Professional and Technical Services budget (OOM). There are no additional costs beyond the licensing fee. • Patron Incident Tracking Software: The annual subscription fee is $3,500 and is paid for using the Library’s existing OOM funding. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • The Library is not aware of any.

15. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Body Worn Cameras Unit Submitted by: Deputy Peter Vellucci Date: 2/11/26 Surveillance Technology: Body Worn Cameras (BWC) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Body Worn Cameras (“BWC”) were issued on April 1, 2025. Every sworn member of the department received a BWC, which recorded over 63,740 videos, not including training/testing the equipment. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third party? In accordance with Rule14, BWC footage is routinely shared with the Middlesex District Attorney's Office. Footage has also been shared with the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office and Suffolk Superior Court Probation Department. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? There have been no complaints regarding the use of this technology. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? There were no violations of the Surveillance Policy with the BWC technology. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? The use of BWC is effective at achieving its purpose which is to enhance transparency between the department and the public by documenting interactions between officers and members of the public while officers are acting in their official capacity. BWCs improve accountability by providing supervisors with objective information to review incidents, ensure policy compliance, and more effectively coach and support officers. Additionally, recorded footage of police in public interactions has been shown to reduce complaints and allows for more accurate, timely, and efficient resolution of incidents and investigations.

6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66, § 10, body-worn camera footage has been disclosed on 39 occasions in response to requests submitted through the City of Cambridge public records request portal. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? The total cost for the BWC program during this timeframe was $455,833.39. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? No communities are disproportionately impacted by the use of BWCs. BWCs are deployed department-wide, and every sworn member of the department will wear a BWC while in their official capacity during a public interaction. This includes all dispatched and officer- initiated calls for service.

16. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): CID and Professional Standards Unit Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/25/2026 Surveillance Technology: Case Cracker by Onyx 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Case Cracker by Onyx is a police interview room audiovisual recording management system. Case Cracker allows authorized users to monitor interviews being conducted in dedicated interview rooms and later playback or export the interview for evidentiary purposes as needed. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? Yes. The Department provides the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office with interview recordings when required as part of the mandatory discovery process in criminal proceedings. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? Yes. Case Cracker has been effectively used in the Criminal Investigations Section and Professional Standards Unit to monitor and record interviews. Investigators have been able to successfully utilize the technology to playback and review their interviews to assist with report writing and preparing evidence in legal proceedings.

6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? None. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? Description Payments Interval Amount Service Agreement 14 Month Term / Paid in Advance 1 One-Time $7,291.35 Warranty (5/1/26 - 6/30/27) 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. Recordings are all done voluntarily. Audiovisual recordings are posited to alleviate public concerns connected with suspect treatment in custodial settings. There is a compelling societal interest in requiring the video recording of police interviews and interrogations. The benefits of recording custodial interrogations go above and beyond transparency and extend not only to the accused, but also to the police, defense attorneys, prosecutors, fact finders, and the public.

17.CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): CIS Days, DV/SA & Cyber Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/11/2026 Surveillance Technology: • GPS tracking devices (2) • Digital Intelligence Workstation • Dell Laptop BCERT • Magnet Forensics–Axiom • Cellebrite • SoundThinking's Acoustic Gunshot Detection Technology (ShotSpotter) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • GPS Tracking Devices: o Global Positioning System (GPS) is a technology that makes possible exact location tracking through satellite trilateration using a network of satellites orbiting the Earth. The satellites can communicate with specialized receivers on the ground, providing the exact location of the receiver. o The CPD possesses and utilizes two of these receivers to assist in certain criminal investigations (thefts of bicycles and packages). A GPS device is attached to a bicycle or package that might be stolen and, if a theft occurs, CPD tracks the item. • Cell phone and computer forensic analysis tools: o Digital Intelligence Workstation: Digital Intelligence Workstation is one of many tools utilized by the Criminal Investigation’s Cybercrime Unit to investigate computer-related crimes. This hardware allows Cybercrime Detectives to “image” a hard- drive for future analysis by computer software tools using Axiom-Magnet Forensics. o Dell Laptop BCERT: Dell Laptop BCERT is hardware that is utilized to recover evidence from computer equipment (e.g. hard-drives, etc.). All evidence collection would be obtained with a court ordered search warrant or owner’s consent. o Magnet Forensics – Axiom: Axiom-Magnet Forensics is software that can analyze the history of a file, recover digital evidence and analyze and report on digital evidence. All

evidence collection would be obtained with a court ordered search warrant or owner’s consent. o Cellebrite: Cellebrite is a forensic software tool used to analyze digital evidence in a similar fashion to Axiom-Magnet Forensics. Cellebrite is utilized for iOS and newer cellular phones, whereas Axiom is used by detectives for Androids and older cellular phones. All evidence collection would be obtained with a court ordered search warrant or owner’s consent. • ShotSpotter: SoundThinking’s ShotSpotter is an acoustic gunshot detection technology that utilizes acoustic sensors to connect wirelessly to ShotSpotter’s centralized, cloud-based application to detect and accurately locate gunshots using triangulation. Sensors are only triggered when at least three can simultaneously detect the same, loud, gunshot-like sound and can verify a location. This automatically sends a short audio snippet to the ShotSpotter Incident Review Center (IRC) in Washington DC. The IRC analyzes the recording to confirm gunfire, before alerting the police. This entire process from the sound occurring to police notification typically takes place in under a minute. The use of ShotSpotter allows Cambridge Police Officers to respond to a higher percentage of gunfire incidents, improve response times to crime scenes to better aid victims and find witnesses, and help police locate key evidence to identify and investigate suspects. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • ShotSpotter: o Yes, Metro Boston Homeland Security Region (MBHSR) law enforcement agencies can receive Cambridge ShotSpotter notifications for officer and public safety reasons. o Also, ShotSpotter data was shared at a public Cambridge City Council meeting concerning ShotSpotter technology in June of 2025. o However, no personal identifiable information is associated with a ShotSpotter incident. Live streaming of sensor audio is not possible by ShotSpotter employees, police, or third parties. • For all technologies: The Department provides the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office with mandatory discovery on all criminal prosecutions. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None.

4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? No. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • GPS Tracking Devices: o Yes, the technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. The technology has allowed the Department to identify a number of bike and package thefts again this year. • Cell phone and computer forensic analysis tools: o Digital Intelligence Workstation; Dell Laptop BCERT; Magnet Forensics – Axiom; Cellebrite; and Getdata Forensic Explorer: Yes, the technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. The technology has allowed detectives from the Department’s Cyber Unit to effectively search and analyze computers and cell phones in dozens of criminal investigations. • ShotSpotter: o Yes, ShotSpotter was effective in supporting the investigations of multiple shots fired incidents in 2025, three of which resulted in arrests and/or charges of involved suspects. o 2025 Cambridge Shooting Stats vs ShotSpotter Alerts  Total number of confirmed shooting incidents citywide – 9  Total shooting incidents within the ShotSpotter coverage area – 7  Total number of confirmed shootings with ShotSpotter activations – 3 • NOTE: This leaves 4 confirmed shooting incidents in the ShotSpotter coverage area that did NOT have a ShotSpotter activation. Of those four, two took place within buildings, which can muffle the gunshots, making it harder for the sensors to detect the sound, and one was on July 4th, when ShotSpotter turns down the sensitivity of the sensors due to the increase in fireworks during the holiday. The July 4th shooting that did not immediately result in a ShotSpotter alert was later located and confirmed by audio when investigators followed up directly with ShotSpotter.  All three confirmed shootings that resulted in ShotSpotter activations in 2025 resulted in charges or arrests of involved suspects.

 All three confirmed shootings that resulted in ShotSpotter activations in 2025 also resulted in 911 calls as well. No confirmed shooting was only known about from a ShotSpotter activation this year. o ShotSpotter activations that could not be confirmed as shootings – 5  Two of these false positive ShotSpotter activations were determined to involve construction noises, one involved fireworks, one was believed to be a loud snowplow, and one source could not be determined. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • Yes, in September 2025, Public Records Request P251910 was received by the City of Cambridge Law Department in which The Black Response Cambridge (“TBR”) requested all documentation (e.g. the agreement records) related to ShotSpotter in the City of Cambridge. However, the BRIC/UASI handles all requests involving documentation (as opposed to the ShotSpotter data itself), so the requesting party was directed to contact the BRIC/UASI instead and, to our knowledge, nothing was provided by the City of Cambridge. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • GPS Tracking Devices: None. • Cell phone and computer forensic analysis tools: o Digital Intelligence Workstation; Dell Laptop BCERT; Magnet Forensics – Axiom; Cellebrite and Getdata Forensic Explorer: Cellebrite: $4,300 Magnet Forensics-Axiom: $6,235 • ShotSpotter: o Approximately $50k/year which is funded by Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • GPS Tracking Devices: o The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. While the privacy implications for tracking individuals and items using GPS are wide-ranging; the technology as currently employed by the Cambridge Police Department should have no disproportionate impact because it

is only utilized to track property (bikes/packages) stolen from the Cambridge Police Department. • Cell phone and computer forensic analysis tools: o Digital Intelligence Workstation; Dell Laptop BCERT; Magnet Forensics – Axiom; Cellebrite :  The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. Where police engage in a search of any type, privacy concerns are at their highest. This technology is utilized in a wide range of investigations in which a cell phone or computer device is lawfully seized. This technology is only utilized where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, after consent is provided or a search warrant is obtained. • ShotSpotter: o None known. Human voices will never trigger a sensor because they do not produce an instantaneous sharp sound and are not loud enough to be picked up by three or more sensors. o A data driven approach based on the prevalence of gunfire and/or gunshot victims was used to determine the 1.1-square-mile geographic area to be covered. The high concentration of these calls has persisted in the same region of the city since first installed. Police do not determine where to place sensors and do not have access to a database of sensor locations.

18. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Crime Analysis & CID Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/11/2026 Surveillance Technology: • BRIC Crime View Dashboard (Formerly Omega Dashboard) • CrimeTracer (Formerly Coplink) • QED • Incident Database • LexisNexis – Accurint for Law Enforcement • LENS 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • BRIC Crime Explorer Dashboard: o BRIC Crime Explorer Dashboard (formerly Omega Dashboard) is the Intel portal for the Boston Regional Intelligence Center (BRIC). The BRIC works at the forefront of intelligence collection and analysis. The BRIC allows for a regional approach to analyze whether crimes are interconnected by geography, type, or method. The BRIC covers the Metro Boston Homeland Security Region (MBHSR), consisting of: Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Quincy, Revere, Somerville, Winthrop, the Greater Boston Police Council (Boston Area Police Emergency Radio Network—BAPERN), Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport), and Metro Fire Association. o In order to have the most complete accounting of what crimes and trends are impacting the region, it is necessary for all cities and towns, including Cambridge, to contribute intelligence information. As such, the Cambridge Police Department contributes the following information: Approved incident and arrest reports and Field Interview and Observation (FIO) reports for certain cases (Confidential items, such as specifically marked domestic, juvenile, and sexual assault reports, are excluded). o Through the BRIC Dashboard, the Crime Analysis Unit also has access to the Special Events dashboard that is maintained by the BRIC. This dashboard provides insight into upcoming special events occurring in the UASI region, which allows for the CPD to prepare for any events in Cambridge that may require extra police presence to maintain both public safety and the rights of the participants.

• CrimeTracer: o CrimeTracer (formerly COPLINK) is one of the “solutions and services” provided through NESPIN (New England State Police Information Network®). CrimeTracer is a data sharing and crime analytics platform. o NESPIN (New England State Police Information Network®) is the local arm of a national project known as the RISS Program (Regional Information Sharing Systems). The goal of RISS is to assist local, state, federal, and tribal Criminal Justice partners by providing adaptive solutions and services that facilitate information sharing, support criminal investigations, and promote officer safety. NESPIN is one of only six RISS centers operating nationwide. • QED: o QED currently functions as CPD’s Record Management System (RMS). A records management system (RMS) is “an agency-wide system that provides for the storage, retrieval, retention, manipulation, archiving, and viewing of information, records, documents, or files pertaining to law enforcement operations. In this context, records are limited to documents or electronic files directly related to law enforcement operations such as incident and accident reports, arrests, citations, warrants, case management, field contacts, etc.” • Incident Database: o The Incident Database is a Microsoft® Access database of corrected Records Management System Data. The database is used to “clean up” or keep a more accurate record of the data that comes into the Records Management System (RMS) (e.g., initially a report may be coded in QED as a Larceny over $1200, but more specifically it can be classified as a Larceny of a Bicycle—this database accurately reflects the appropriate crime types for the purposes of analysis and for the Uniform Crime Reporting/National Incident-Based Reporting System code). • LexisNexis – Accurint® for Law Enforcement: o LexisNexis is a search engine. Users pay a fee to search public records and other information compiled by the provider. It serves as a research tool used to locate people, companies, businesses, phone numbers, properties and fragments of information; this information helps to create a more complete picture of what we are investigating. (e.g., the Department entered the name and phone number of an individual who had been the victim of a scam; this search lead us to where the “scammer” found the victim’s information, potentially creating a solid investigative lead). o No other products offered by LexisNexis are currently in use by this unit. • LENS (Law Enforcement Notification System): o The Law Enforcement Notification System (LENS) is a web-based system which provides local law enforcement with information on federal offenders currently on supervision with the U.S. Courts. This release of information is required by the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994. Qualifying offenders include those convicted of certain drug trafficking crimes, crimes of violence, sex offenses, and those

convicted of internet child pornography offenses included as part of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. LENS allows real time updates regarding these offenders and provides the ability to search neighboring jurisdictions and nationwide. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • BRIC Crime Explorer Dashboard (FKA Omega Dashboard): Yes. The Department shares incident data with the BRIC on a daily basis for effective regional law enforcement. • CrimeTracer (FKA Coplink): Yes. The Department shares incident data with CrimeTracer on a daily basis for effective statewide law enforcement. • QED: Yes. The Department regularly shares incident data with fellow law enforcement and provides records for public records requests. • Incident Database: Yes. The Crime Analysis Unit creates weekly, monthly, and annual reports based on this crime data. • For all other technologies: The Department provides the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office with mandatory discovery on all criminal prosecutions. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? No. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • BRIC Crime Explorer Dashboard (FKA Omega Dashboard): o Yes, this technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology allows the Department to obtain regional crime data (and crime mapping) about local offenders/offenses on a regular basis to help effectively solve crime and make arrests. It has also assisted the Department in planning for upcoming events that could impact public safety. • CrimeTracer (FKA Coplink): o Yes, this technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology allows the Department to obtain statewide crime data (and crime

mapping) about local offenders/offenses on a daily basis to help effectively solve crime, make arrests, and assist with licensing decisions. • QED: o Yes, this technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. QED serves as the central report writing and incident documentation system for the Department. The Department is required by state and federal law, as well as court procedural rules, to document a variety of police encounters, whether for criminal, civil, or administrative matters. • Incident Database: o Yes, this technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This database is a condensed accounting of QED incidents for purposes of crime analysis and statistical reporting. This database is effectively utilized for weekly, monthly, and annual crime reporting. • LexisNexis - Accurint® for Law Enforcement: o Yes, this technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology allows Department personnel to effectively search public records and publicly available records to locate offenders, victims and witnesses for criminal investigations and trials. This database is also an effective tool for licensing decisions. • LENS: o Yes, this technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology allows the Department to identify Cambridge residents who are on federal probation. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No requests were received about the Surveillance Technology itself, but the following Public Information Requests received via the Cambridge Law Department were fulfilled using the featured Surveillance Technology in 2025: o QED – At least 14 Public Records Requests o Incident Database – At least 2 Public Records Requests • The following public reports and data requests were also compiled/fulfilled by the Crime Analysis Unit using Surveillance Technology during 2025: o The Crime Analysis Unit used data from QED and the Incident Database for the department’s public Annual Crime Report, 12 Bridgestat reports (citywide crime data releases to the public on a monthly basis), 22 crime review reports for public neighborhood meetings throughout the year, 20 crime review reports for public business district meetings, at least 8 crime review reports for public meetings concerning specific problem addresses, and numerous Cambridge City Council

requests for data pertaining to crime in the Central Square area throughout the year. o Both QED and the Incident Database are used each year to compile data for threat assessments for large scale public events in Cambridge (including but not limited to MIT and Harvard Commencements, the Cambridge Dance Party, Fourth of July celebrations, the Caribbean Festival, and the Head of the Charles Regatta). o Both QED and the Incident Database are used each year to provide crime data to colleges and universities, both locally and across the country, as mandated by the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act). At least 45 requests for this data were fulfilled in 2025. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • BRIC Crime Explorer Dashboard (FKA Omega Dashboard): o The BRIC Omega Dashboard has no financial costs to the City of Cambridge. It is funded by the Department of Homeland Security. • CrimeTracer (FKA Coplink): o RISS/NESPIN/CrimeTracer has no financial costs to the City of Cambridge. It is funded by the federal government. • QED: o QED is a longstanding multi-agency product (Police, Fire, ECD). Its initial costs are unknown. According to the Director of ECD, the combined annual maintenance cost for all three agencies is $60K. • Incident Database: o This database is created using Microsoft® Access, available through the City’s Microsoft Office suite, and is of little to no cost to the Department. • LexisNexis – Accurint® For Law Enforcement: o $33,377.40 • LENS: o There are no costs to CPD, as the program is federally managed and funded. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • BRIC Crime Explorer Dashboard (FKA Omega Dashboard): o The Department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. However, anytime large amounts of intelligence information are gathered, significant privacy implications exist. The BRIC maintains a strict policy designed to “protect individual privacy, civil rights, civil liberties, and other protected interests” [Boston Regional Intelligence Center Privacy, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Protection Policy].

 The 43-page policy states [in part]: The BRIC will not seek or retain and originating agencies will agree to not submit information about individuals or organizations solely on the basis of their religious, political, or social views or activities; their participation in a particular noncriminal organization or lawful event; or their races, ethnicities, citizenship, places of origin, ages, disabilities, genders, or sexual orientation. o The Cambridge Police are committed to responsibly accessing regional systems in manners that are consistent with Cambridge values and in compliance with its ordinances and practices. Based on its current usage and the significant safeguards in place, this technology has a minimal privacy impact on Cantabrigians and surrounding communities. • CrimeTracer (FKA Coplink): o The Department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. The NESPIN/RISS Centers operate their intelligence system under the Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies (28 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 23). All RISS member agencies have agreed to comply with the requirements of 28 CFR Part 23 with respect to any criminal information they submit into an applicable RISS Criminal Intelligence Database (RISS/Intel). RISS has adopted a comprehensive privacy policy to protect individual privacy, civil rights, civil liberties, and other protected interests [RISS's Commitment to Safeguarding Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties]. o The Cambridge Police Department is committed to responsibly accessing regional systems in manners that are consistent with Cambridge values and in compliance with its ordinances and practices. • QED: o The Department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. QED serves as the central report writing and incident documentation system for the Department. The Department is required by state and federal law, as well as court procedural rules, to document a variety of police encounters, whether for criminal, civil, or administrative matters. o The Cambridge Police Department is committed to responsibly maintaining systems in manners that are consistent with Cambridge values and in compliance with its ordinances and practices. Only CJIS Compliant Certified Public Safety Employees in the performance of their official duties may access, use, or disseminate information contained in QED for official and lawful criminal justice purposes. Based on its current usage and the significant safeguards in place, this technology has a minimal privacy impact on Cantabrigians and surrounding communities. • Incident Database:

o The Department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This database is a condensed and corrected accounting of QED incidents for purposes of crime incident statistical reporting. The Department is required by state and federal law, as well as court procedural rules, to document a variety of police encounters, whether for criminal, civil, or administrative matters. o The Cambridge Police Department is committed to responsibly maintaining systems in manners that are consistent with Cambridge values and in compliance with its ordinances and practices. Only CJIS Compliant Certified Public Safety Employees in the performance of their official duties may access, use, or disseminate information contained in this limited database for official and lawful criminal justice purposes. Based on its current usage and the significant safeguards in place, this technology has a minimal privacy impact on Cantabrigians and surrounding communities. • LexisNexis – Accurint® for Law Enforcement: o The Department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. LexisNexis is a private, for-profit company that provides its service for a fee. The Cambridge Police Department is committed to responsibly accessing this service in a manner that is consistent with Cambridge’s values. • LENS: o The Department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This technology has a minimal impact as the Department only has access to information about those individuals who are Cambridge residents that are on federal probation. The information is accessed via a restricted web site for official use only and is provided through a federally managed application/ portal. Only CJIS Compliant Certified Public Safety Employees in the performance of their official duties may access, use, or disseminate information contained in LENS for official and lawful criminal justice purposes. The LENS web site informs users that “…Unauthorized use is subject to prosecution under Title 18 of the U.S. Code”, and that “…all activities and access attempts are logged.”

19. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Crime Scene Services, Booking and Records Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: February 6, 2026 Surveillance Technology: • Morpho (soon to be ABIS) -Automated Fingerprint Identification System(AFIS) with camera (Massachusetts State Police (MSP) System) • Live Scan (3 devices) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Morpho (ABIS) AFIS: o A fingerprint database through the Massachusetts State Police (MSP). It allows the Department’s Crime Scene Serves Section to compare unknown latent fingerprints to a state and federal database of known fingerprints when investigating criminal activity. • Live Scan: o Digital fingerprint system with live feed to the Massachusetts State Police and Federal Bureau of Investigation for identification and criminal history. Live Scan is used to document and identify persons in lawful police custody or those persons who voluntarily wish to be fingerprinted. The technology is also utilized for statutorily mandated background checks for firearms licensing and to comply with federal and state security requirements for City employees 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • Morpho (ABIS) AFIS: o For each case where this technology is utilized, data is shared with the MSP. If a latent print is identified to a known print by members of the Department’s Crime Scene Services Unit, the data will be shared with an external police department for verification purposes under the ACE-V methodology for fingerprint analysis. • Live Scan: o Every live scan entry is shared with the FBI and MSP. The FBI shares fingerprints with other federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security.

• For both technologies: The Department provides the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office with mandatory discovery on all criminal prosecutions. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Morpho (ABIS) AFIS: o Yes. Technology has been effective in achieving the stated purpose. The technology has allowed the Department to identify a number of offenders based on latent fingerprints left at crime scenes or on evidence • Live Scan: o Yes. Technology has been effective in achieving the stated purpose. The technology allows the Department to verify the identity of someone in police custody and obtain their federal and state criminal history for law enforcement purposes. The technology is also effective for completing firearms licensing background checks and security requirements for City employees. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Morpho (ABIS) AFIS: Annual maintenance costs are approximately $6,433.00 • Live scan: Annual maintenance costs are approximately $6, 411.00 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • Morpho (ABIS) AFIS: o The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. It is utilized to analyze all unknown latent fingerprints recovered from a crime scene or evidence.

• Live Scan: o The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This technology is used to document and identify all persons in lawful police custody. This technology is also utilized for all persons voluntarily seeking to be fingerprinted, voluntarily applying for a license to carry a firearm, or who voluntarily seek unattended access to the police station.

20. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): EOD Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/13/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Wireless Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) robots with cameras: Robotex Avatar II 2 (3); Foster Miller Tallon 4; Foster Miller Dragon Runner 4; Remotetec F6A 4 with fiberoptic • Tactical Electronics VF52 Fiber Scope • ATF Bomb Arson Tracking System (BATS) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Wireless EOD robots with cameras: o These devices provide robot gripper and camera assistance that can be remotely deployed to provide a live image of a suspected explosive device. The devices are various sizes: Robotex Avatar II 2 is a small platform, Foster Miller Tallon 4 & Foster Miller Dragon Runner 4 are medium platform, and the Remotetec F6A 4 with fiberoptic is a large platform. o These devices provide fast and reliable threat assessment for explosive ordinance disposal and bomb technicians. Grippers allow for device manipulation. Cameras allow for visual inspection via distance. • Tactical Electronics VF52 Fiber Scope: o Optical scope technology used to view enclosed or secure areas for explosive mitigation. o Provides fast and reliable threat assessment for EOD and bomb technicians. • ATF BATS: o The Bomb Arson Tracking System (BATS) is a web-based case management system that allows state and local arson and explosive investigators access to up- to-date arson and explosive data from across the nation. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • Wireless EOD robots with cameras and Tactical Electronics VF52 Fiber Scope: o No. The EOD does not use this technology to record any data. • ATF BATS:

o Yes. The Department enters bomb and arson cases into this system, which are shared with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Wireless EOD robots with cameras and Tactical Electronics VF52 Fiber Scope: o Yes. The technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology has been regularly deployed to determine whether explosive devices are in a given location or piece of property. • ATF BATS: o Yes. The technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. The technology allows the Department’s EOD to report and track arson and bomb cases. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • None 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Wireless EOD robots with cameras: o None. • Tactical Electronics VF52 Fiber Scope: o None. • ATF BATS: o None. Access provided by ATF at no charge. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology?

• Wireless EOD robots with cameras and Tactical Electronics VF52 Fiber Scope: o The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This technology is utilized minimally during exigent circumstances when an explosive device is believed to be present. The images captured are only of the suspected explosive device and its immediate surroundings. • ATF BATS: o The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This technology is only used to track arson and bomb incidents.

21. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Fleet Submitted by: Commissioner Elow Date: 2/9/2026 Surveillance Technology: Prisoner Transport Security Cameras (Transport Wagon 236, 263 & ) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Prisoner Transport Security Cameras. Prisoner Transport Security Cameras provide enhanced safety for transporting officers and prisoners by recording the circumstances of individuals’ transportation by CPD. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • For all technologies: The Department provides the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office with mandatory discovery on all criminal prosecutions. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Yes. This technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. The cameras are used to view people lawfully in police custody who are being transported by the Department and are effectively used for their safety and the safety of the transport officers. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • None 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • None

8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This technology is only used to view people lawfully in police custody who are being transported by the Department and is implemented strictly for their safety and the safety of the transporting officers. The information is saved for 14 days and is automatically written over unless affirmative action is taken to save a particular piece of footage.

22. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): PIO Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/13/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Media Monitoring - Agility PR • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Media Monitoring – Agility PR: Agility PR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors media channels and social media platforms to identify relevant content based on keyword search terms. The platform provides access to a media contacts database, and is used to distribute CPD media announcements. Agility PR is also used to monitor media coverage of the Cambridge Police Department and to compile daily news coverage reports with internal staff. • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows the CPD to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, respond to messages on various social media platforms, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • None, other than the actual posting of social media on social media platforms. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None

5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Yes, the technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology has allowed the PIO to view mentions and posts about the Department, as well as help shape the Department’s social media strategy. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • The Public Information Office did not directly receive any public records requests. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • Agility PR and Sprout Social are funded by the annual subscription costs paid by the City’s Public Information Office. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • The department is not aware of any community disproportionately impacted by these technologies. This technology has a minimal impact as the software merely aggregates publicly available news coverage, social media posts and mentions.

23. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Professional Standards Unit Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/10/2026 Surveillance Technology: Infraware 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Infraware. Infraware is a dictation software that records a person’s voice for transcription purposes. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • Copies of interview transcripts have been produced for criminal proceedings. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Yes. The technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology has allowed the PSU to obtain transcripts for internal investigations. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • $4,182.03

8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • No. This technology is utilized to obtain transcripts of voluntary interviews given during internal PSU investigations.

24. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Cambridge Police Department Division or Unit (if applicable): Criminal Investigations Section (CIS) Submitted by: Deputy Superintendent John W. Boyle Date: 02/13/2026 Surveillance Technology: Covert Cameras (Axis M5528-E and Axis M5075-G) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Covert cameras are deployed only in serious cases that pose a significant security or public safety risk. Cameras are placed in specified locations to capture images of suspected illegal activity. Per policy, these cameras cannot be deployed without the approval of a Police Superintendent or the Police Commissioner. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? The data was not shared with any other third parties. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? On 9/4/25 a pole camera was placed Sidney Street near Green Street to supplement public safety cameras during the Cambridge Carnival 9/7/25. The camera was removed on 9/8/25, 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? None. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? None. Axis Communications provided the cameras on loan to the department. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? The Department is not aware of any community being disproportionately impacted by this technology. Covert cameras are deployed only in serious cases that pose a significant security or public safety risk, and with prior approval.

25. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Department Division or Unit (if applicable): Special Response Team (SRT) Submitted by: Commissioner Christine Elow Date: 02/13/2026 Surveillance Technology: Throwbot XT 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Throwbot XT. This technology is a throwable micro-robot platform that enables operators to obtain instantaneous video and audio. The device does not record. It can be placed, or made to travel (crawl), into hazardous situations (without risking human exposure to harm) in order to allow operators to quickly make informed decisions when seconds count. This device was not deployed in 2022. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? None 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? The technology has been effective in realizing the stated purpose. This technology has allowed the Special Response Team to assess whether a threat exists before making lawful entry or taking further action. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? None 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? None 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology?

The department does not know of any community disproportionately impacted by this technology. This technology is used in minimal situations where an exigency exists, and the Special Response Team needs to assess whether a threat exists before making lawful entry or taking further action. The audio and video captured in real time are not recorded or stored.

26. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Department Division or Unit (if applicable): Criminal Investigations Section Submitted by: Supt. Cabral Date: February 11, 2026 Surveillance Technology: Public Safety Cameras 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Public Safety Cameras were deployed in June of 2025. The goal was to have 6 deployed throughout Central Square. Due to ongoing construction, only 5 are working at this time. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? No video footage was shared with a third party. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? The Police Department has not received any complaints regarding this technology. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? There were no violations of the Surveillance Policy regarding the use of this technology. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? Yes. The surveillance technology has been effective in achieving its intended purpose. The cameras were installed to deter criminal activity and assist with investigations when incidents occur. Signage is posted at each location to promote transparency and deter criminal activity. They have already proven to be valuable assets in two serious incidents involving armed individuals. The footage helped investigators identify and locate the suspects with minimal impact on the community. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? We received 2 Public Record requests for footage from the Public Safety Cameras that were shared. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? The cost the Police Department incurred for this technology was $3546.00 for software and licensing. UASI funded the hardware purchase of $47,967.86, which is not a reoccurring cost.

8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? Public Safety Cameras are at fixed locations in the Central Square Business District. There have been no communities disproportionately impacted by this technology.

27. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Department Division or Unit (if applicable): Criminal Investigations Section Submitted by: Supt. Fred Cabral Date: February 19, 2026 Surveillance Technology: Locked Cellular Device Access Software 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? The Grey key locked cellular access tool has been used approximately 25 times within the past year. The technology was only used after a search warrant had been issued to unlock and access the data. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? The data has been shared with the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office during the course of ongoing criminal investigations. The data could be shared with the U.S. Attorney’s Office pursuant to a federal criminal investigation. An example of this would be a child pornography case. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? The department has not received any complaints concerning this Surveillance Technology. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? There have been no violations of the Surveillance Use Police regarding this technology. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? This technology has been highly effective in cases involving child pornography, death investigations and financial/fraud investigations 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? We have received no public records requests regarding this technology.

7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? The annual cost for this device is $62,00.00 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? No communities have been impacted by this technology.

28. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Department Division or Unit (if applicable): Criminal Investigations Submitted by: Supt. Fred Cabral Date: February 11, 2026 Surveillance Technology: Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? ALPR technology was installed in June of 2025. The equipment was mostly operational by August 4th, 2025. 1 of the 16 cameras was still not functioning appropriately. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? Footage was shared on two occasions. Once with Medford PD for a hit and run and once with Boston PD for a stolen vehicle. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? Although there have been no complaints directed to the Police Department regarding this technology, several concerns were highlighted during city council meetings that were publicly addressed. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? There were no violations of the Surveillance Policy with the use of this technology. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? The surveillance technology was operationally deployed as a pilot program from August through November of 2025. During that period, implementation challenges required ongoing troubleshooting of the devices. Before the program could be fully evaluated for effectiveness, significant concerns were raised by members of our community regarding the vendor, Flock Safety. After reviewing both national reports and the concerns expressed locally, we made the decision to discontinue use of Flock Safety’s system. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? The department did receive public records requests after the program was decommissioned in November. Requests were made after the 30 day retention period, which yielded no results to share.

7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? The total amount of expenses for the ALPR program that the City incurred was $24,000. The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) also covered another $24,000. The program is no longer in effect. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? No communities have been disproportionately impacted by this technology. At the November 2025 Public Safety meeting, residents in housing communities voiced the need for ALPR technologies to increase solvability for crimes in their neighborhood (not specifically Flock Safety).

29. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Cambridge Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Criminal Investigations Section Submitted by: Deputy Superintendent John W. Boyle Date: February 13, 2026 Surveillance Technology: NameUs 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? NameUs (National Missing and Unidentified Persons System): NameUs is a national database and resource center for missing unidentified and unclaimed persons cases throughout the United States. NameUs is the nation’s only centralized federal program that offers free forensic, investigative, and analytical services to resolve all long-term missing and unidentified cases. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? Yes. Detectives occasionally enter case data allowing them to search and crossmatch missing person cases with unidentified remains records to resolve cases and bring resolution to families. Only vetted professional users like law enforcement, medical examiners, coroners, and allied forensic professionals can view sensitive case details and fully access the database. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? Yes, nationwide, NameUs has assisted with the resolution of over 46,600 missing, unidentified, and unclaimed persons cases. NameUs has brought additional attention and awareness to long term missing persons cases that CPD has been investigating. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? None.

7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? All NameUs services and resources are provided at no cost. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funds and administers NameUs. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? None.

30. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Police Division or Unit (if applicable): Clinical Support Unit Submitted by: James Barrett Date: February 5, 2026 Surveillance Technology: CIMS 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? CIMS (Critical Incident Management System). CIMS is a software product developed to support countywide police led programs intending to document all overdose incidents within county jurisdictions, document all outreach attempts to individuals who have overdosed or are at-risk for overdose, and facilitate the transition of those experiencing drug overdoses to treatment. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? Providers and first responders who are part of the CIMS database are able to access the data, however it is not shared with any third parties outside of CIMS. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? We have not received any complaints related to CIMS. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? Yes. We were able to receive notification that 5 Cambridge residents had overdosed in another town or city and were at high risk of another incident. We were also able to enter and alert surrounding towns/cities that 20 of their residents had experienced an overdose in Cambridge so that their community response team could follow up with them in their community. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? We did not receive any public records requests related to CIMS.

7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? No cost. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? We did not identify any communities that would be disproportionately impacted by CIMS.

31. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Public Health Division or Unit (if applicable): Public Health Nursing Epidemiology and Data Services Submitted by: Derrick Neal & Anna Kaplan Date: February 24, 2026 Surveillance Technology: MAVEN (Massachusetts Virtual Epidemiologic Network) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? MAVEN (Massachusetts Virtual Epidemiologic Network). MAVEN is a PHIN (Public Health Information Network) compliant, secure web-based surveillance and case management system for infectious diseases that enables rapid, efficient communication among local and state health departments and laboratories. MAVEN allows the department to conduct case investigations and case management in collaboration with other local boards of health. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? ● Surveillance data is only shared with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, as required by state law. ● Within MAVEN, we also occasionally share case data with other local boards of health in order to collaborate on an investigation. For example, a Cambridge resident who works at a business in Lexington may be shared with the Lexington Board of Health, within the MAVEN system. ● Beginning in March 2022, Cambridge received a grant along with Revere, Chelsea, and Winthrop to operate a shared COVID-19 case investigation team in collaboration with MAPC as the coordinating body. Two staff are based at the Cambridge Public Health Department, and three staff are employed by MAPC. These staff have MAVEN access to COVID-19 cases in the four cities and towns. Summary reports of these efforts are regularly shared with representatives from the four cities and towns. This grant will end in June 2026. ● Beginning in February 2026, through an MDPH shared services grant, Cambridge began sharing MAVEN data with a shared regional epidemiologist who works with the Cambridge and Somerville local boards of health. They share aggregated reports internally to improve service delivery.

● Aggregated data and data analysis were shared with the public via the City's COVID-19 Data Dashboard. These are not shared in any identifiable way. The dashboard is no longer updated as of the end of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency in May 2023, but historic data remain available via the City’s Open Data Portal. ● Aggregated data and analysis are shared through public reporting, similar to how COVID-19 data were previously presented, including other reportable communicable diseases. These data are published through an annual communicable disease report on the CPHD website, as well as in two open data sets on the Open Data Portal. CPHD will adhere to privacy guidelines and will not share any identifiable information. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? ● MAVEN remains an essential tool for CPHD to complete state-mandated infectious disease investigation work. For example, in 2025, CPHD received reports of 205 reportable and investigatable infectious diseases among Cambridge residents, excluding COVID-19 and reportable diseases that do not require investigation, such as influenza. ● Any follow up and investigation is logged in MAVEN by public health nursing and epidemiology staff. For example, a person living in Cambridge who tests positive for norovirus will trigger a notification to CPHD. All information, including symptoms, contacts, and behaviors related to transmission, are logged in MAVEN. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? None 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? Costs for the acquisition, operation, and maintenance of MAVEN are covered by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. CPHD staff use MAVEN to do state-mandated infectious disease investigations but are not involved in maintenance of the system. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? All confirmed, probable and suspected cases of reportable infectious diseases among Cambridge residents are required to be reported to the state health department and/or the

Cambridge Public Health Department via MAVEN, where they are managed and investigated. Representation in the MAVEN system is a function of the distribution of disease in the Cambridge population and the health care utilization rates among Cambridge residents, both of which may vary by sub-group within Cambridge. Wherever possible, CPHD considers the potential over- or under-representation of marginalized communities in Cambridge in our infectious disease investigation work.

32. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Public Works Division or Unit (if applicable): Community Relations Submitted by: Jennifer Mathews Date: 2/17/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social • Media Monitoring – Agility PR 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Social Media Monitoring - Sprout Social: Sprout Social is a software as a service (SaaS) that allows DPW to coordinate the scheduling of social media posts, respond to messages, and evaluate the effectiveness of our social media efforts and strategy. Additionally, Sprout Social allows for direct connection to external help solutions (to open service request tickets) and provides a social customer relationship management (CRM) for staff within the platform. • Media Monitoring – Agility PR: Agility PR is a software as a service (SaaS) company that monitors media channels and digital/print media platforms to identify relevant content based on keyword search terms. The platform provides access to a media contacts database and is used to distribute city media releases. Agility PR is also used to monitor coverage of the City of Cambridge and key topic areas of interest to DPW. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • No 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • None 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose?

• Social Media Monitoring – Sprout Social: Yes. This tool has allowed DPW to better coordinate social media efforts in terms of content reaction, strategy evaluation, and responsiveness to our followers. The advantage of this tool is that all our social platforms can be accessed within one account, which is secured by various permission levels. It allows for quick access and control of City social media accounts during an emergency situation and provides a way for the city to coordinate the dissemination of information to the public. • Media Monitoring – Agility PR: Yes. This technology allows the City to respond to media reports regarding the City of Cambridge and DPW in a timely and appropriate manner. It allows the department to measure the impact of our media outreach efforts and adjust strategy to improve coverage. The tool also provides us with access to journalist and media outlet contacts from across the nation. It centralizes communication efforts among communications staff in various City departments and allows for centralized monitoring and coordination of citywide efforts. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • None 7. How much did it cost to acquire and operate Surveillance Technology? • Annual subscription costs for both products are covered by the Operations and Maintenance budget from the Public Information Office’s budget. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • No

33. ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Public Works Division or Unit (if applicable): Streets/Snow Operations Submitted by: Jennifer Mathews Date: 02/17/2026 Surveillance Technology: Road Weather Information Station Cameras 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • Road Weather Information Station Cameras – DPW has two cameras attached to Road Weather Information System stations, which are used to monitor roadway conditions during winter storms. The cameras/stations are located on traffic light mast arms at the intersections of 3rd Street and Binney Street and Massachusetts Avenue and Cedar Street. The cameras take static images of the pavement directly below them every 10 minutes. The images are used to supplement data received from the systems themselves and improve planning for winter operations. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • No. The static images of roadway conditions are stored on a third-party site, to which only a handful of staff at (< 5) at Public Works who are involved in snow operations can access with a username and password. Data has not been shared outside of that subscription-based system or beyond DPW staff responsible for monitoring roadway conditions. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • Yes. The cameras have been a helpful addition to the information systems. They have allowed DPW to confirm roadway conditions and better prioritize staff time and City resources during winter operations, particularly salting.

6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • N/A. Public Works has a contract for the operation and maintenance of the Road Weather Information System stations. Beyond the one-time cost of purchasing the camera hardware, there has been no additional annual cost or increase to the contract for operating them. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • No

34. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Public Schools Division or Unit (if applicable): Information, Communications & Technology Services Submitted by: Kevin Keegan, & Dr. McCanne Date: 02/26/25 Surveillance Technology: ● LightSpeed System (Web Filter) ● IP Address Collection Platforms (Sonicwall Firewall; Windows Server; Apache Web Server; Crowd Strike; CrowdStrike SIEM, GrayLog) ● GoTeacher ● Open Architects 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? ● LightSpeed Systems (Web Filter) (Jul 23-Present) o This technology is employed as a web filter only on all CPS Chromebooks. The filter is a Chrome plugin that is managed and deployed at the Google Domain level to all CPS-owned Chromebooks. Once this is set it requires no other maintenance. The web filter will block sites that are considered potentially unsafe or harmful to students. o LightSpeed Systems blocks the following categories of content: Pornography, Drugs, Gambling, Other Adult Content, Social Media, Anonymous Proxies, Chat Messaging, Hate, Social Networking, Streaming Media, and Games. There is also Keyword blocking as well. As well as an AI influence as well for images and video. o LightSpeed Systems also has enhanced logging which will protect our student body’s Internet traffic while away from school but will not log their activity. ● IP Address Collection Platforms o The school department uses various platforms that collect IP addresses from internal and external connections and connection attempts, e.g., the CPS website, CPS firewall, traffic and network traffic analyzers. While the platforms vary, the surveillance capabilities and functionality are the same. IP address information is used to limit and protect the City network from malicious sites and unauthorized access. ● GoTeacher Compliance/ROI/Insights 1

o The platform has multiple functions: cross-references online app resources with data privacy agreements for compliance reporting, utilization of licensing vs licenses owned, and classifies online resources by learning standards, content genres, and subjects. These functions are limited to in-school activities based on device IP address assigned by the internal network. ● Open Architects (OA) o OA is a data visualization platform. OA connects to current database resources to help us better understand student performance data and more easily correlate across data sources. (This is currently being set up as a pilot and should be functional in March of 2026) 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third party? ● LightSpeed Systems for Chromebooks Web Filter o No*. This data is not shared with third parties; in addition, all vendor-provided applications employed by the school department that may, or do, collect student-level data are protected against inappropriate use of student data by the vendor through Student Data Privacy Agreements (DPA). These agreements ensure that any and all student-level data collected is only used for the purpose of providing the service the vendor was engaged for, and nothing else**. All school department DPAs are available on the CPS website.1 The DPAs employed by CPS are both an MA State and National Model DPA developed by the Student Data Privacy Consortium2 and leveraged throughout the K12 Educational Technology Marketplace to protect student data from inappropriate uses. ▪ * Per the DPA, if law enforcement contacts the provider (LightSpeed Systems) for data held by LightSpeed Systems, the provider “shall notify the LEA (CPS) in advance of a compelled disclosure to the Requesting Party, unless lawfully directed by the Requesting Party not to inform the LEA of the request”. ▪ ** Per the DPA, de-identified data may also be used for “purposes allowed under FERPA and the following purposes: (1) assisting the LEA or other governmental agencies in conducting research and other studies; and (2) research and development of the Provider's educational sites, services, or applications, and to demonstrate the effectiveness of the Services; and (3) for adaptive learning purpose and for customized student learning…… Provider agrees not to transfer de-identified Student Data to any party unless (a) that party agrees in writing not to attempt re-identification, and 2 See https://privacy.a4l.orgAggregateAggregatethroughAggregate/ 1 See https://sdpc.a4l.org/district_listing.php?districtID=457 2

(b) prior written notice has been given to the LEA who has provided prior written consent for such transfer.” ● IP Address Collection Platforms o No. This data is not shared with any third parties ● GoTeacher Compliance/ROI/Insights o Aggregate information about purchased products used (no student or teacher data) is shared through a METAA program designed to enable school districts to better leverage pricing and facilitate vendor management. ● Open Architects (OA) o OA but does not share any data with third parties. We have a SPDA with OA. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? ● No complaints have been received 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? ● No violations were found last year. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? ● LightSpeed Systems Web Filter o Yes, all student-issued Chromebooks are filtered as required by the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA). ● IP Address Collection Platforms o Yes. The IP Collection technologies have been very effective in both protecting the school department's network from intrusion as well as being proactive against malicious activity. ● GoTeacher Compliance/ROI/Insights o Unknown as of yet. We are only a couple weeks into the implementation. ● Open Architects (OA) o Unknown as of yet. 3

6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? ● No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? ● LightSpeed System Web Filter o $18,425 ● IP Address Collection Platforms o Firewall - $37,023 annually o Windows Server Virtual Environment – 32,800 one-time licensing. o Apache Web Server - Open Source, no cost o Antivirus Software - $35,835 annually, SIEM Software included o Logging Software – No Cost ● GoTeacher Compliance/ROI/Insights o $9500 ● Open Architects (OA) o No cost during pilot 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? ● LightSpeed Systems Web Filter o All students utilizing CPS issued Chromebooks at home are receiving the same level of content filtering. Students who have access to personal or family devices to complete required student work at home are not bound by the same filter that is intended to protect students from potentially harmful content. ● IP Address Collection Platforms o No. The IP Address Collection Platforms automatically operate in a standardized way. They impact all individuals attempting to access the school department’s websites, resources or network in the same way. ● GoTeacher Compliance/ROI/Insights o No. All devices are configured in the same manner. ● Open Architects (OA) 4

o No, one of the key points about the use of OA is to help us identify educational impacts. 5

35. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Public Schools Division or Unit (if applicable): Safety & Security, Transportation Submitted by: Damon Smith Date: 2/26/2026 Surveillance Technology: ● Bus Video Recorders ● GPS Devices ● Edulog Transportation System 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? ● Bus video recorders: Cameras are installed on all school buses. The cameras on the school buses allow the school department to review any incidents that take place, after the event is over. The cameras allow the department to determine the source of any behavioral issues on the bus. The footage helps CPS staff and parents clarify what actually happened during an incident and supplements any report from a student or bus driver. ● GPS devices: These devices are installed on vehicles transporting students. GPS units are attached to the student transportation vehicles to monitor and report back the physical location of the vehicles to the CPS Transportation Department. The GPS units monitor the physical location of each vehicle in real time. ● Edulog Transportation System: The Edulog Transportation system is a database used by the CPS Transportation Department to manage the bus routes and student assignments. All information about what buses students ride as well as the buses' locations are stored and managed within this system. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? ● Bus video recorders: Yes, but in limited circumstances. In some cases, parents can view the video footage generated by the video recorders, but parents can only view footage of their child. ● GPS devices: Yes. GPS location data is shared with the contracted transportation company to aid in the delivery of the bus transportation service. Parents can also view

data on the location of the bus to which their child is assigned through a secure parent portal. ● Edulog Transportation System: Yes. Data on bus routes and locations is shared with the contracted transportation company to aid in the delivery of the bus transportation service. Parents can also view data on the route of the bus to which their child is assigned through a secure parent portal. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? ● Bus video recorders: None. ● GPS devices: There have been instances in which the need to substitute specific buses has resulted in the GPS technology being inoperable for specific routes. We continue to work with the vendor to minimize these occurrences. ● Edulog Transportation System: None. 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? ● No violations were found last year. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? ● Bus video recorders: Yes. The recorders captured any discipline issues that occurred on the buses. ● GPS devices: Yes. The bus locations are generally tracked in real time. ● Edulog Transportation System: Yes. Edulog was leveraged to build all required bus routes. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? ● No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology?

● Bus video recorders: There is a $60,000 provision in the current contract, which expires in June 2025. Moving forward, this expense will be included in the contractual daily rate for bus services. ● GPS devices: No costs in the past year. ● Edulog Transportation System: Ongoing Maintenance – $ 23,592.61 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? ● CPS is not aware of any communities disproportionately impacted by these technologies

36. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Transportation Division or Unit (if applicable): Parking Management, Street Management Submitted by: Jeff Parenti Date: 2/26/26 Surveillance Technology: • ATLAS RMV Portal (Parking Management) • Traffic Signal Detection Cameras (Street Management Division) • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units (Street Management Division) • NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units (Street Management Division) 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? • ATLAS RMV Portal: ATLAS is a web application provided by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to access the RMV system and used by the Parking Management division. It is used by Parking Services staff to issue resident parking permits, view handicap placard information, and clear holds on licenses and vehicle registrations. No data is collected or stored, and the public cannot access it. • Traffic Signal Detection Cameras: These cameras are deployed at a limited number of signalized intersections across the City. The detection cameras include 360-degree units manufactured by Miovision and directional cameras manufactured by Iteris. They are used for detection of roadway users, to classify their mode of transportation, and to quantify their movements at signalized intersections in the City of Cambridge, and to assist in the optimized operation of traffic signals. The aggregated data collected is analyzed and used to improve the efficiency and safety of operations for all roadway users. The technology also provides City staff with continuous roadway user counts to allow for evaluation of seasonal and annual traffic volume variations to assist in future design and planning projects. • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: These units are deployed in the field by transportation consultants, at various locations on a temporary basis. The units are typically attached to a signal, utility, or streetlight pole within the right of way. This technology collects traffic video and data that is later processed to provide a variety of traffic related data such as turning movement counts, intersection counts and classifications, and road volume counts. • NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: These units are deployed in the field by transportation consultants, at various locations on a temporary basis. The units are typically attached to a signal, utility, or streetlight pole within the right of way. This technology collects traffic video and data that is later processed to provide a variety of traffic related data such as turning movement counts, intersection counts and classifications, and road volume counts.

2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? • ATLAS: No data has been shared with a third-party. • Miovision Intersection Cameras: These cameras are accessed by the Vendor, MioVision, and by the City’s signal contractor, Dagle Electric Corporation, for purposes of set up, training, and troubleshooting of the product. Access is only controlled by designated city staff and only provided when required for troubleshooting. • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: Video from these units is collected and accessed by Transportation Consultants who deploy the units. A system was implemented that requires Consultants or other entities to request permission to deploy this type of data collection equipment on public property. Between 3/1/25 and 2/24/26 we received 7 requests to deploy data collection devices at 66 locations. Several of the requests submitted by consultants supported work being done by the City of Cambridge. • NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: Video from these units is collected and accessed by Transportation Consultants who deploy the units. A system was implemented that requires Consultants or other entities to request permission to deploy this type of data collection equipment on public property. Between 3/1/25 and 2/24/26 we received 3 requests to deploy data collection devices at 52 locations. 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? • ATLAS: None • Miovision Intersection Cameras: None • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: None • NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? • No violations have been found. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? • ATLAS: Yes. ATLAS is used daily by Parking Services staff to issue resident parking permits, view handicap placard information and clear license and registration holds. In 2024, 37,463 Resident Parking Permits were issued. In FY24, the last year for which the RMV provided this data, there were 13,892 chargeable clears for license and registrations holds. • Traffic Signal Detection Cameras: Yes. The Miovision units were installed in late 2019 and are functioning as expected. The vehicle traffic counts collected by the Miovision units provided insights in changes in traffic volumes and traffic patterns. We continue to evaluate the efficacy of bicycle and pedestrian counts generated by the Miovision

cameras. The directional cameras operate as expected and detect vehicles to optimize signal operations. • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: Yes. These data collection units are a significant improvement over past manual and tube data collection methods. In the past, counts have been taken by hand, which is far more labor intensive and limits the amount and timeframe of the data collected. Tubes used for data collection frequently malfunctioned or were destroyed by road traffic or street cleaning vehicles. Overall, the video-based data collection allows for better data collection, and as a result, far better data analysis for transportation planning. In addition, it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain detailed counts using any other methodology as most vendors are using this technology. • NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: Yes. These data collection units are a significant improvement over past manual and tube data collection methods. In the past, counts have been taken by hand, which is far more labor intensive and limits the amount and timeframe of the data collected. Tubes used for data collection frequently malfunctioned or were destroyed by road traffic or street cleaning vehicles. Overall, the video-based data collection allows for better data collection, and as a result, far better data analysis for transportation planning. In addition, it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain detailed counts using any other methodology as most vendors are using this technology. 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: Because Miovision units are similar in appearance to cameras that record and save video recordings, the City regularly receives requests for camera footage from locations where Miovision Cameras are located. However, since the Miovision units do not record or save any video footage, there are no recordings to provide. We explain this in response to any records requests or public inquiries. 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? • ATLAS: There is a $20.00 per transaction RMV surcharge for license plate clears. In FY 2024, the last year for which the RMV provided this data, there were 13,982 chargeable clears for license and registrations holds, which are assessed through a reduction in local aid provided on the Cherry Sheet Assessments. • Traffic Signal Detection Cameras: The City pays $26,000 annually for the ongoing communication and data costs associated with the Miovision Cameras. • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: These are typically installed by traffic engineering consultants as part of the overall cost of a transportation planning or traffic engineering study, such as a Traffic Impact Study required for a private development project. The City pays for data collection as part of our consultant contracts for construction and transportation projects. These costs would be incurred for manual data collection if automated collection was not available.

• NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: These are typically installed by traffic engineering consultants as part of the overall cost of a transportation planning or traffic engineering study, such as a Traffic Impact Study required for a private development project. The City pays for data collection as part of our consultant contracts for construction and transportation projects. These costs would be incurred for manual data collection if automated collection was not available. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? • ATLAS: The Portal allows DOT staff to access detailed personal information about Cambridge residents. The information accessed is not collected or stored and the public cannot access it. The information is only accessed by Parking Services staff when issuing resident parking permits, viewing handicap placard information, and clearing holds on licenses and vehicle registrations, all of which are requested by the customer. The data available on the Portal may have a greater impact on the privacy of those individuals who own a vehicle than those individuals who do not own a vehicle, since staff only access the vehicle registration data for residents who own cars. Access to the Portal is password protected and the Parking Services Staff who use ATLAS receive individual, detailed training which includes best practices for protecting personal information. As such, the use of the Massachusetts RMV Website Portal does not have any disproportionate impact on any population. • Traffic Signal Detection Cameras: Although they are installed in specific communities that have specific demographics, they observe all users that pass through an intersection, whether or not those users come from those local communities. Typically, these units are installed at major intersections which carry both local and regional traffic. The technology does not retain any personally identifiable information, and does not impact the drivers, cyclists and pedestrians that are counted by the cameras. As such, the use of Detection Cameras does not have any disproportionate impact on any one population. • Miovision Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: The units record all users that pass by the unit, whether or not those users come from those local communities. These units are also deployed for very short periods of time, further limiting impacts. While data collection is used across the City, it is possible that data collection, and thus video recording, will occur most frequently in areas with significant new development, thus possibly impacting these areas more than parts of the City with less development. However, these cameras primarily collect data that is not personally identifiable. Overall, the use of Miovision Intersection Cameras does not have disproportionate impacts on any population. • NDS Aura Traffic Count Mobile Camera Units: The units record all users that pass by the unit, whether or not those users come from those local communities. These units are also deployed for very short periods of time, further limiting impacts. While data collection is used across the City, it is possible that data collection, and thus video recording, will occur most frequently in areas with significant new development, thus possibly impacting these areas more than parts of the City with less development. However, these cameras primarily collect data that is not personally identifiable.

Overall, the use of NDS Aura Cameras does not have disproportionate impacts on any population.

37. ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Department: Water Division or Unit (if applicable): Submitted by: Mark Gallagher & Fred Centanni Date: 2/5/2026 Surveillance Technology: • Automated Meter Reading (AMR) System • AMR Consumer Engagement Tool 1. What Surveillance Technologies has the department used in the last year? Automated Meter Reading (AMR) System. The Water Department’s AMR system is a radio-based system which transmits on a Federal Communication Commission (FCC) licensed/reserved frequency. Meter Transmitter Units (MTUs) are attached to every water meter throughout the city. The MTU transmits water meter reads in a propriety format. These reads are transmitted every 4 hours on a floating schedule. For example, an MTU will transmit a read today at 6:00AM, and then transmit a read tomorrow at 6:03AM. The reads are received by the Data Collection Units (DCUs) located within the city. The DCUs transmit the meter readings, using a cell phone network, to a communications computer located at the Water Department. The communications computer then transfers the data to a database computer which translates the data in order for the city to view the water meter reads. This allows the Water Department to provide actual reads for billing and allows us to alert customers for potential leaks at their property. Below is an example of our AclaraOne software and the data collected: AMR Consumer Engagement Tool:

Using water meter data from the Department’s AMR system, water customers will be able to view their own daily water usage on-line to promote conservation and detect water leaks. The data will be stored on a remote server, hosted by our vendor. The individual data will be accessible through the City’s web page and access will be protected by individual account log-in security which will be approved by our IT Department. 2. Has any Surveillance Technology data been shared with a third-party? No 3. What complaints (if any) has your department received about Surveillance Technology? None 4. Were any violations of the Surveillance Use Policy found in the last year? None. 5. Has Surveillance Technology been effective in achieving its identified purpose? Yes 6. Did the department receive any public records requests concerning Surveillance Technology? No 7. What were the total annual costs of the Surveillance Technology? - Automated Meter Reading (AMR) System: o The department completed the upgrade of the AMR system to replace all the MTUs because the batteries reached their life expectancy. o The department upgraded STAR to AclaraOne software at a cost of $56,000. AclaraOne is the new name for STAR. o The department has an annual maintenance agreement for approximately $15,000. - AMR Consumer Engagement Tool: o The department is implementing this for 2026 at a cost of $50,000. - Source of funds – Capital Water Funds for everything except the annual maintenance agreement which come from Operating Water Funds. 8. Are any communities disproportionately impacted by Surveillance Technology? No. Every property that has a water service has a water meter regardless of any other criteria. This allows CWD to provide actual reads for billing and to alert all customers of any potential leaks in their property. Additionally, all customers will be able to sign up for Consumer Engagement at no additional cost.