No more encryption in calif as of Jan 1 2024

[marcotor]

It’s certainly not as difficult as people like you or those selling the service try to make it out.

I wonder if you can contact OCFA Chief Fennessy and let him know the multi-million dollar quote he has been handed to un-encrypt Orange County Fire radios from OCComms is wrong, and school him how EASY it is to do.

 

[rooivalk]

The state wouldn't dare do that...
Santa Cruz county is a political stronghold that NO state agency likes to mess with.

Santa Cruz county kicked out and eliminated a state DOJ funded drug task force a few years ago. It's a progressive bastion where the locals will NOT cooperate with the feds or the state DOJ.

Santa Cruz city and county do NOT cooperate with the feds at any level. DHS, ICE, FBI, DEA all get the cold shoulder when they arrive in SC. No mutual aid...no assistance with cover...NADA.

You roll a stack of FBI cars thru town for a 6am raid, you can forget any assistance from the locals.

I have no doubt the county can encrypt...but getting the actual funding approved is going to be a chore, once the funds request hit the board of supervisors agenda.

And just like Free Radio Santa Cruz, which has been a pirate FM station in town since 1995...nobody will do anything...for the fear of upsetting the locals.

No even the mighty Santa Cruz Co. can fight the power CLETS has, and I doubt that SC CO has turned away CLETS Auditors...
Here's the CLETS Manual...Quite the read: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/clets-ppp 12-2019.pdf

 

[Peter_SD911]

No even the mighty Santa Cruz Co. can fight the power CLETS has, and I doubt that SC CO has turned away CLETS Auditors...
Here's the CLETS Manual...Quite the read: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/clets-ppp 12-2019.pdf

Well The county disbanded and kicked out the state DOJ drug task force SCCNET and refuses to cooperate with DHS on ANY matter.

SC county is already ignoring this "mandate".
NETCOM does what the county tells them to do.

I'm just stating fact.
Come visit SC county some time and attend a Santa Cruz City Council meeting...or a Board of Supervisors meeting and see.

 

[mmckenna]

SC county is already ignoring this "mandate".

Wrong. SC County is working towards this just like every other agency in the state has been since 2020.

NETCOM does what the county tells them to do.

Wrong. NETCOM is larger than Santa Cruz County.

I'm just stating fact.

Wrong. You are stating things as "facts" that are incorrect, assumptions, and filled with political motivation.

We can see through that.

 

[Peter_SD911]

Let me remind you of something...
Politics pay for radio systems.

If the political atmosphere in Santa Cruz allowed it...your encrypted trunked system would have been funded long ago.

Do you have the funding to "flip the switch"?

Why not just use the "County Red" in a switched encryption if the equipment is already in place?

These are legit question any citizen would want to know.

Last...
How much will it cost to reprogram all those radios?
Is your company part of the bid?
You seem very knowledgeable about the system...but not the procurement process and political ramifications in the most "anti-police" county in the state.

Budgets and politics go together.


Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.

 

[mmckenna]

Let me remind you of something...
Politics pay for radio systems.

County taxpayers pay for radio systems, some DHS funding pays for radios. And remember, as I've said a few times now, the County already has what it needs to run encryption. That's been funded over the last 10 years or so. Everyone saw this coming. Everyone knew that P25 was coming. Everyone knew that encryption was coming. There is only one decision that needs to be made at this point, that is if the county wants to put up a bond measure to fund a trunked system. If it got funded, they'd go P25 trunked with encryption. If they don't fund it, they'll migrate to P25 conventional with encryption. The equipment to do P25 conventional with encryption is in place.

As of now, there has been no ballot measures on this.

If the political atmosphere in Santa Cruz allowed it...your encrypted trunked system would have been funded long ago.

No, it wouldn't. Again, I'm not sure what you are basing your assumptions on here. But they are assumptions.
I've been working directly on this. You, obviously, have not.

No one wanted a trunked system here. There isn't enough radio traffic to warrant a trunked system. Only some in the fire departments want a trunked system.
There is currently no funding for it, and based off the price, it is going to take a large bond measure to fund it. I wouldn't be confident that will pass. It might, it might not. Truth is, it's not needed. It's a few in some agencies that are pushing for it.
The availability of a trunked system has no bearing on if they go encrypted or not. They will just use existing hardware to run P25 conventional with encryption.

Do you have the funding to "flip the switch"?

No real funding required. Everything is in place.

Why not just use the "County Red" in a switched encryption if the equipment is already i place?

It's just a case of programming. Give it time.
Since County Red is a mutual aid channel, there's a lot of agencies that need to be involved. There's some reluctance to do all that if they are going to go trunked.

Last...
How much will it cost to reprogram all those radios?

Not sure, but the county/agencies are pretty good about keeping up with codeplug updates and periodic maintenance. Since the radios all get touched at some point, it's not really the big deal that some think it is. These guys are on top of it and they are not the type to put a radio out in the field and never touch it again.

Is your company part of the bid?

The agency I work for has mutual aid agreements. Being able to interoperate with the law enforcement, fire agencies and AMR in the county is part of my responsibility. I've been replacing radios now for a while to make sure we are ready to handle P25 conventional with encryption or P25 trunked with encryption. Whatever the county chooses, I'll be ready to go. I've worked closely with the County shop and our chief works closely with the law enforcement agencies. These are all discussions going on without the involvement of RadioReference.
We're on top of this and we know whats going on.

Budgets and politics go together.

That is an oversimplified statement. It doesn't take into account the realities of multiyear budgets, planning or purchasing contracts. Politics tends to be a year by year thing.
Some politicians may claim that they are going to do certain things with budgets, but this stuff is long since decided. Politicians wouldn't know which end of the radio to talk into and would likely just poke their own eyes out with the antenna. The decisions regarding radio systems happens at a different level with different people. Most of these budgets are well established. Decisions are made by budget analysts. Final approval of the entire budget usually happens at once and they are not picked apart in by political opponents.

 

[Peter_SD911]

County taxpayers pay for radio systems, some DHS funding pays for radios. And remember, as I've said a few times now, the County already has what it needs to run encryption. That's been funded over the last 10 years or so. Everyone saw this coming. Everyone knew that P25 was coming. Everyone knew that encryption was coming. There is only one decision that needs to be made at this point, that is if the county wants to put up a bond measure to fund a trunked system. If it got funded, they'd go P25 trunked with encryption. If they don't fund it, they'll migrate to P25 conventional with encryption. The equipment to do P25 conventional with encryption is in place.

As of now, there has been no ballot measures on this.




No, it wouldn't. Again, I'm not sure what you are basing your assumptions on here. But they are assumptions.
I've been working directly on this. You, obviously, have not.

No one wanted a trunked system here. There isn't enough radio traffic to warrant a trunked system. Only some in the fire departments want a trunked system.
There is currently no funding for it, and based off the price, it is going to take a large bond measure to fund it. I wouldn't be confident that will pass. It might, it might not. Truth is, it's not needed. It's a few in some agencies that are pushing for it.
The availability of a trunked system has no bearing on if they go encrypted or not. They will just use existing hardware to run P25 conventional with encryption.



No real funding required. Everything is in place.



It's just a case of programming. Give it time.
Since County Red is a mutual aid channel, there's a lot of agencies that need to be involved. There's some reluctance to do all that if they are going to go trunked.



Not sure, but the county/agencies are pretty good about keeping up with codeplug updates and periodic maintenance. Since the radios all get touched at some point, it's not really the big deal that some think it is. These guys are on top of it and they are not the type to put a radio out in the field and never touch it again.



The agency I work for has mutual aid agreements. Being able to interoperate with the law enforcement, fire agencies and AMR in the county is part of my responsibility. I've been replacing radios now for a while to make sure we are ready to handle P25 conventional with encryption or P25 trunked with encryption. Whatever the county chooses, I'll be ready to go. I've worked closely with the County shop and our chief works closely with the law enforcement agencies. These are all discussions going on without the involvement of RadioReference.
We're on top of this and we know whats going on.



That is an oversimplified statement. It doesn't take into account the realities of multiyear budgets, planning or purchasing contracts. Politics tends to be a year by year thing.
Some politicians may claim that they are going to do certain things with budgets, but this stuff is long since decided. Politicians wouldn't know which end of the radio to talk into and would likely just poke their own eyes out with the antenna. The decisions regarding radio systems happens at a different level with different people. Most of these budgets are well established. Decisions are made by budget analysts. Final approval of the entire budget usually happens at once and they are not picked apart in by political opponents.

Thanks for those details...good stuff.

Curious as to how the state parks folks will adapt.
Are they going to have a county VHF radio, or will they just use the APX radios?

Ca state parks has a large footprint in the county.

Any thoughts?

 

[CopperWhopper67]

I understand all of the pushback but I also completely understand the reason for supporting this legislation. Encrypting sensitive channels/tg's like SWAT tacs and records is obviously completely understandable, but locking down the main Dispatch!? C'mon. People already don't trust police and they're pulling this BS now? It really projects the image that these agencies have something to hide, and if I'm being a little cynical seems like it's a slippery slope to big Daddy Police State. Heavily scrutinizing our police and them knowing that the people are watching, filming and listening is part of what keeps them professional and accountable, lest we turn into France.

 

[mmckenna]

Thanks for those details...good stuff.

Curious as to how the state parks folks will adapt.
Are they going to have a county VHF radio, or will they just use the APX radios?

I suspect they'll eventually get multiband radios on the State Parks systems as well as CRIS, if they don't already.

They do have access to CLEMARS, and NETCOM as well as the other PSAP's in the County all use that. Usually

 

[CopperWhopper67]

Palo Alto IS in compliance. If you were listening, you may have noticed DL numbers are no longer transmitted alongside a name. Additionally, DOB is broken up from the last/first name. "Last, First,Gender, Break for DOB" *unkey* "1/2/34"

As silly as it seems, this is in compliance.

So if just this change in procedure is compliant, then why bother doing to enormous work to switch to E anyway?

 

[mmckenna]

So if just this change in procedure is compliant, then why bother doing to enormous work to switch to E anyway?

It's not compliant in the true sense of the rule.

 

[CopperWhopper67]

It's not compliant in the true sense of the rule.

How is CHP's procedure compliant? Is it similar to what has been described in that post?

 

[mmckenna]

How is CHP's procedure compliant? Is it similar to what has been described in that post?

It's not.
The requirement is to protect CJI/PII in all forms at all times. Simply unkeying the mic between pieces of info isn't compliant.

It's similar to me finding your social security number and splitting it up and posting it here on this site in 3 different posts.

 

[marcotor]

On this Thanksgiving evening, I am thankful as I read this thread for:

mmckenna!

Who never takes the bait, who is patient to a level I can only dream of with a community who has all the answers, in spite of many knowing nothing about the challenges, politics, back-biting, and the assorted egos involved in herding public safety officials when it comes to radio systems. I also can't imagine how many hams (and yes, I am an amateur license holder) and other experts try to tell him his system needs this or that, how he's "doing it wrong", or doing what the boss(es) tell him to do is "not the way I'd do it".

Hat's off!

 

[mmckenna]

Hat's off!

Well, thanks, but my replies get heavily edited before I submit them. If you saw the raw stuff, you'd probably put your hat back on. But there's the right way to have a discussion and the wrong way. I've been at my current job 25 years, and if I got into arguments with everyone at work, I never would have lasted. Part of my job is to make sure we do things right, wether it's with the FCC, the DOJ, or any number of other agencies. I have to represent my employer at many levels. I have to talk with a lot of high level individuals. Having constructive and civil discussions is just part of the job. Nothing would get accomplished without that skill.

Most of this stuff is invisible to the hobby crowd. Some will read a few news articles, or yell into some echo chambers and then post it as gospel. Unfortunately most of it misses the mark. Some of it by a long way.

I'm not trying to be an expert here. I'm trying to share accurate information with hobbyists so they can see how this stuff works. I too started off with a shortwave radio, a CB and a scanner. I got my ham ticket right out of high school. I got a lot of help from others along the way. I never forgot where I started, and I never forgot who helped me get where I am. I try to do the same for others. I'm always happy to help out where I can. Accurate information is a valuable resource. Unfortunately, there's a lot of noise out there that has to be filtered out.

 

[d119]

What assumptions?
Those were all statements of fact.
I stated they were in the clear. I never stated anything as to the reason or anything else.
I also thanked them.
So they went back to encryption...I never said they wouldn't or couldn't

So again I ask you....
What was incorrect or an "assumption"?

I will be happy to correct any info I was wrong with.
What we learned...
SD harbor PD and Airport will dump encryption for mutual aid reasons according to D119.

I "ASSUME" D119 confirmed this ,and has 2 reliable sources???

The old skool media required 2 good sources....what did the county radio shop require for "sources"?
Show your work D119 !!!




In the future I will get your approval ...before I post.

I'm not going to engage you - you need help dude. My information comes from a post on this forum in the San Diego subforum where a user stated that was the reason.

You just went ahead and posted that they have unencrypted, and the tone of your post, including the "Thank You" implied it was permanent.

I don't argue with children - have a pleasant afternoon. (Like if you agree!)

 

[CopperWhopper67]

It's not.
The requirement is to protect CJI/PII in all forms at all times. Simply unkeying the mic between pieces of info isn't compliant.

It's similar to me finding your social security number and splitting it up and posting it here on this site in 3 different posts.

So what's the jig here bro? Sounds like you have some good answers but, the back-and-forth that this Peter guy started is unfortunately distracting everyone from what most of us cali people want to know, did this DOJ mandate screw us over? In your opinion, with the experience you have in this industry, in this state.. How numbered are our the days of pub safety Rx here in the golden state? The radio enthusiasts of California have enjoyed some of the most open PS communications in the country.... is it over?

And as a bonus question... what do you suspect the 20+ analog counties are to do about this? Are we going to see a wave of DTRS and Digital conventional deployments in these areas?

 

[KevinC]

So what's the jig here bro? Sounds like you have some good answers but, the back-and-forth that this Peter guy started is unfortunately distracting everyone from what most of us cali people want to know, did this DOJ mandate screw us over? In your opinion, with the experience you have in this industry, in this state.. How numbered are our the days of pub safety Rx here in the golden state? The radio enthusiasts of California have enjoyed some of the most open PS communications in the country.... is it over?

And as a bonus question... what do you suspect the 20+ analog counties are to do about this? Are we going to see a wave of DTRS and Digital conventional deployments in these areas?

Bonus question for you. Why didn't you ask these questions under your other account?

 

[CopperWhopper67]

Bonus question for you. Why didn't you ask these questions under your other account?

The account I am sure you are referring to is my roommate's and he figured a mod would suspect account duplication. Can't DM you so, if sharing an IP address is an offense then sorry for the violation, ban me and send me along. Just wanted to be a part of the conversation.

 

[KevinC]

The account I am sure you are referring to is my roommate's and he figured a mod would suspect account duplication. Can't DM you so, if sharing an IP address is an offense then sorry for the violation, ban me and send me along. Just wanted to be a part of the conversation.

So you have the same email name as the name of the other account I’m referring to. Now THAT’S a coincidence.