Get a daily overview of the best stories about Urban Milwaukee
Security cameras. (Pixabay license).
A new resolution of the Milwaukee County Council is trying to shed light and potentially slow down, the adoption by the county of facial recognition technology.
The resolution, introduced by Sup. Juan Miguel MartinezAnd coparrained by five other supervisors, sketches concerns that facial recognition technology could be used to violate civil rights or suppress speeches and request the development of a county facial recognition policy before technology is adopted more by the County government.
Martinez told Urban Milwaukee that he fears that technology will be used to monitor and suppress protected speeches and political activity, and that he will be used to target minority communities.
“”I am vehemently to facial recognition technology, and I just want to make sure everyone knows it, and I want to make sure that we, as a county, propose more viable solutions, “said Martinez.” These kinds of things accuse nothing, it all makes more and more people. “”
The county council has a limited power to direct the policy, in particular for all that falls into the field of Milwaukee County SheriffDesk (MCSO). The resolution requires the county break any other adoption of the technology of facial recognition until a policy on a county level can be adopted.
Martinez wants the Corporation Counsel office to work with the MCSO and the Division of Information Management Services (IMSD) to develop a policy that describes when facial recognition can and cannot be used, set strict limits on data collection and retention and creates a transparent process monitoring of technology and its use by the county.
Get a daily overview of Milwaukee stories
More specifically, Martinez’s resolution seeks to prohibit facial recognition technology without the consent of the digitized person, except in “closely defined” situations as a criminal investigation; Define and limit the data captured using technology and establish rules for data duration and when it is deleted; Prohibit the sharing of facial recognition data with third parties unless “the authorization of a rigorous and transparent approval process subject to surveillance”; And require that departments using technology to subject reports on its use, “including measures on deployment, efficiency and analysis of potential disparate impacts on colored communities, immigrants and other vulnerable populations.”
Members of Milwaukee Common Council and civil rights organizations have recently raised concerns concerning Milwaukee police department“MPD) (MPD) Use of facial recognition technology, as an urban milwaukee reported. A letter from May signed by 10 members of the Council said that “facial recognition systems are subject to errors, with Studies showing higher identification error rates For people of color, women and other marginalized groups. »»
MPD plans to provide A software company called Biometrica with 2.5 million mugshots in exchange for free access to its technology. The ministry has already discreetly used technology, raising other law enforcement organizations to search for their databases, according to a report by the MPD chief of staff Heather Hough At Milwaukee fire and police commission. This includes the sheriff’s office, which used biometrica facial recognition technology at least 50 times, would identify 48 suspects in the process.
The MCSO did not answer questions about its use of biometric technology. The company, which has offices in Arizona and Nevada, has not responded to requests from an interview with Urban Milwaukee.
THE American Union of Civil Liberties of Wisconsin And more than a dozen other civic organizations and advocacy groups want the common council to prevent the MPD from implementing facial recognition technology. The coalition is ask for adoption of a Community Order of Control on Police Surveillance (CCOPS), which “would democratize the decision -making process” for technology and surveillance practices in Milwaukee. This includes the approval of the common council before any new technology and annual reports on how it was used.
The proposed provisions of the CCOPS echo what Martinez asks at the county level. Supplier Justin Bielinski,, Anne O’Connor,, Steven Shea,, Jack Eckblad And Caroline Gómez-Tom have already co -pacarraine the resolution. He will obtain his first hearing on June 17 during the judicial council committee, the application of laws and general services.