Some civil rights groups OK with Lexington’s new police camera software. The ACLU is not
A handful of civil rights advocacy groups that were called on to help Lexington police craft policy around their new camera software system are not in agreement on whether the department should be using the program at all.
Fusus, a camera software that allows the city to link traffic cameras, license plate readers and privately-owned security cameras on a voluntary basis, has been heralded as an impactful investigative tool to “solve crimes quicker,” according to Lexington police Chief Lawrence Weathers.
But even as the city has made efforts to listen to outside groups, concerns over privacy remain.
“Obviously privacy is a big issue for us,” said Kungu Njuguna, a policy strategist for the American Civil Liberties Union in Kentucky. “It’s our wish that they would not use Fusus. It’s not something that we support in terms of mass surveillance.”
Lexington police met with the ACLU, the NAACP and the Lexington Human Rights Commission on April 11 to show them the Fusus software and address any concerns. The meeting occurred about one week before Mayor Linda Gorton publicly announced she was designating $150,000 in the city budget to implement the program.
Njuguna said one of the ACLU’s biggest concerns was the camera integration process, which gives police live access to any camera in the city that has been opted into the system.
“At its height, that means the government can have someone on camera at almost every second of every moment of every day, and that’s concerning,” Njuguna said. “People who have not been accused of any crime are literally under surveillance at all times of the day everywhere they go within Lexington.”
Lexington police said earlier this week only authorized personnel have access to the cameras within the system. Police say they will only use those private cameras if they’re within range of a call for service.
Njuguna said police did listen to the ACLU’s concerns and altered some of their policies at the ACLU’s request, so the organization is hopeful to see positive results.
“For the most part they made the changes we requested,” Njuguna said. “It’s kind of like if you’re going to do a bad thing, at least you do it in the least bad way.”
Susan Straub, a spokesperson for the mayor’s office, said she wasn’t aware of the ACLU expressing concerns directly to the mayor but the mayor was willing to meet with the organization if needed.
Other groups support police use of Fusus
While the ACLU has concerns about privacy, representatives of the NAACP and the Lexington Human Rights Commission came away from April’s meeting feeling good about Lexington police’s use of Fusus. Whit Whitaker, president of the of the NAACP in Lexington, said it could be a good tool for law enforcement as long as it’s used appropriately.
“What we support is any tool that helps to deter crime, and that it’s used in an honest and equitable way, and that it has deep audit controls and policies to prevent misuse,” Whitaker said.
Whitaker couldn’t say whether or not he trusts police to use the technology responsibly. He also added that communication and transparency needs to be a continued priority regardless of whether Fusus is used successfully.
“Regardless of whether or not the program works, you have to take in consideration people’s feelings,” Whitaker said.
Raymond Sexton, director of the Lexington Human Rights Commission, said they looked at the issue of new surveillance technology through the perspective of race, color, sex, religion, age, disability and other protected classes at the meeting and came away feeling good about Fusus.
“There was nothing said or done in that meeting to raise any red flags, that this would adversely impact a particular group of people,” Sexton said.
Sexton said he appreciated Lexington police for seeking their feedback. He said they also sought the commission’s feedback when they introduced body-worn cameras and the Flock license plate readers.
“They’re pretty good at reaching out to us and getting our feedback before (doing) something that could be controversial,” Sexton said.
Police policy limits access to cameras
Only authorized personnel have access to the camera registry and it’s only available in the real-time intelligence center, according to police. The coordinator of the intelligence center will choose who gets to access the footage, and regular audits will be conducted to ensure the video is used correctly, according to the police department’s policy on managing the system.
The coordinator of the intelligence center is picked by the police chief.
Footage from traffic cameras will be held for 60 days while footage from the city-owned video system will be held for 30 days, according to the department’s policy. Footage linked to a criminal investigation will be stored in the digital evidence management system, according to police.
Camera registry data won’t be available to police either, only the camera owner. Additionally, Fusus’ policy only allows camera owners to adjust their camera’s settings, and they cannot be overridden by police.
Hundreds of cameras added to system
Businesses, community partners and citizens have the option to include their cameras into the Fusus software if they choose, and some already have — police said 201 cameras had been either registered or integrated into their system Wednesday. By Friday morning that number had eclipsed 400, according to police data.
When residents register their camera, it lets police know where the camera is, but doesn’t give investigators access to the camera feed. Integrating a camera does give them access to the feed, which police say will only be used when an incident occurs nearby.
This story was originally published August 25, 2023 at 12:20 PM.
