Medford HRC Backs Civilian Involvement In Police Surveillance

MEDFORD, MA — The Medford Human Rights Commission is backing a motion promoting greater transparency in surveillance at the local level. The HRC voted at its October meeting to endorse Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS), a nationwide push to involve community members in the decision to use certain types of surveillance technology.

In Medford, the effort is being spearheaded by Medford People Power, a local grassroots organization and volunteer affiliate of the ACLU dedicated to defending human and civil rights.

Barry Ingber, a member of the organization, said surveillance technology can extend beyond surveillance cameras and facial recognition into other methods people are not aware of, like "stingrays, which mimic cell phone towers and are used to track people's movements, and to intercept and record their conversations."

While the HRC endorsed the principle of expanding community involvement in surveillance efforts, it does not have the power to draft or pass such an ordinance. Munir Jirmanus, chair of the HRC, cited studies showing that facial recognition technology misidentifies people of color and women with a high error rate, reinforcing racial and gender biases.

"We need to be careful and mindful of the potential impact of all of these technologies on civil rights and civil liberties," Jirmanus said.

The CCOPS model would include the following, according to the ACLU:

1. Surveillance technologies should not be funded, acquired, or used without express city
council approval or a transparent public process
2. Local communities should play a significant and meaningful role in determining if and
how surveillance technologies are funded, acquired, or used
3. The process for considering the use of surveillance technologies should be transparent
and well-informed
4. The use of surveillance technologies should not be approved generally; approvals, if
provided, should be for specific technologies and specific, limited uses
5. Surveillance technologies should not be funded, acquired, or used without addressing
their potential impact on civil rights and civil liberties
6. Surveillance technologies should not be funded, acquired, or used without considering
their financial impact
7. To verify legal compliance, surveillance technology use and deployment data should be
reported publicly on an annual basis
8. City council approval should be required for all surveillance technologies and uses; there should be no "grandfathering" for technologies currently in use

"The idea of CCOPS is not to actually forbid the use of any technologies that might assist law enforcement," Jean Zotter, founder of Medford People Power, said. "We want the police to have the tools they need to protect us. We have been meeting regularly with [MPD] Chief Buckley to make sure the ordinance does not impact the police in a way we can’t predict. But we do want to ensure that decisions about these technologies, which could impact both civil liberties and Medford’s budget, are made democratically. There needs to be accountability."

A proposed ordinance would have to go through the regular legislation process and involve the City Council and public feedback. The HRC also endorsed a facial surveillance ban at its most recent meeting, which was proposed by City Councilors Zac Bears and Nicole Morell in March.