A crowd gathers after police arrest a young man across the street from a demonstration. Civil rights groups are concerned that increased facial recognition technology could lead to wrongful arrests, especially for people of color. (NNS file photo)
By Devin Blake
This story was originally published by Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service, where you can find other stories reporting on fifteen city neighborhoods in Milwaukee. Visit milwaukeenns.org.
As the Milwaukee Police Department moves to expand its use of facial recognition technology, a June report from the federal government finds this technology continues to disproportionately misidentify people of color.
Elected officials and civil rights groups have been raising this concern as a clear reason why MPD’s plan should be paused or rejected entirely.
MPD says there are ways to address this limitation.
The Milwaukee Equal Rights Commission on Wednesday, June 18 will hold a public meeting to assess potential discrimination-related risks.
The report
In 2019, the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology released a major report evaluating how demographics affect outcomes in facial recognition systems.
The report found skin color and ethnicity often had an effect.
With domestic law enforcement images, for example, the system most often led to false positives – when someone is incorrectly identified – for American Indians. Rates were also elevated for African American and Asian populations.
On June 2, the agency issued a report showing that facial recognition systems were more likely to mistake people from predominantly darker-skinned regions for someone else.
This included people from Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and the Caribbean, compared with people from Europe and Central Asia.
Higher rates of misidentifications for people of color raise concerns that facial recognition could lead to more wrongful stops and arrests by police.
MPD’s plan
MPD Chief of Staff Heather Hough, speaking during an April meeting of the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission, said the department has used facial recognition technology in the past in coordination with other police departments.
She stressed its crime-fighting benefits.
“Facial recognition technology is a valuable tool in solving crimes and increasing public safety,” Hough said.
Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson supports the use of this technology for the same reason, Jeff Fleming, spokesperson for the mayor’s office, wrote in an email.
“Identifying, apprehending and bringing to justice criminals in our city does reduce crime,” Fleming wrote.
During the commission meeting, Paul Lau, who oversees MPD’s criminal investigations bureau, said the department is considering an official agreement with a company called Biometrica.
“We anticipate this usually being used by our detective bureau in the investigation of major violent felonies,” Lau said.
Community response
Emilio De Torre, executive director of Milwaukee Turners, cited some of the 2019 federal findings in an op-ed, arguing that “entrusting facial recognition to routine policing is not public safety; it is an avoidable risk that history shows will fall hardest on Black Milwaukeeans.”
Milwaukee Turners is one of 19 organizations that sent a letter to the Milwaukee Common Council expressing concerns about surveillance technology. The letter urges the council to adopt an ordinance ensuring community participation in deciding if and how it is used.
Some members of the Common Council have come out in strong opposition to MPD’s plan as well.
“It’s both embarrassing and dangerous for false positives to occur at such a high rate,” Alderman José G.Pérez, Common Councilpresident, told NNS.
Such flaws would likely lead to due process violations, he said.
Addressing flaws
Hough said MPD knows there are people in the community who are “very leery” of police using this technology, adding that their “concerns about civil liberties are important.”
“I want to make it very clear: Facial recognition on its own is never enough. It requires human analysis and additional investigation.”
MPD is committed to a “thoughtful, intentional and mindful” policy that considers community input, Hough said.
Lau said MPD will look into racial bias training provided by Biometrica, and people using the technology will need to have training on best practices.
Biometrica directly addresses concerns about racial disparities on its website.
The company says errors identified in 2019 stemmed from several flaws that can be countered with, for example, anti-bias training for analysts who review facial recognition alerts.
Who gets to decide?
Since Wisconsin Act 12, Milwaukee Police Chief Jeffrey Norman is free to develop any official policy he chooses. The Common Council has the only formal check that exists.
By a two-thirds vote – or 10 of Milwaukee’s 15 aldermen – the council can block or modify MPD policies. But it must wait for a policy to be officially implemented.
The state legislature could pass a statewide ban or restrictions, and the Common Council could adopt an ordinance regulating or banning its use.
Alderman Alex Brower told NNS he will be doing everything in his power, as a member of the Common Council, to oppose MPD’s acquisition of facial recognition technology.
What residents can do
People will have an opportunity to share their opinions about MPD’s plan – for and against – at an upcoming meeting of the Milwaukee Equal Rights Commission.
Commission members will use testimony about facial recognition to help determine the discrimination-related risks it may pose, said Tony Snell, chair of the commission.
“We want to listen to as many people as possible,” Snell said.
The commission can make recommendations to the Common Council, the mayor, MPD and the Fire and Police Commission.
The commission meeting will be held at 4 p.m. Wednesday, June 18, at Milwaukee City Hall, 200 E. Wells St.
People may attend in person or virtually.
Those who wish to speak must register by emailing ERC@milwaukee.gov. Each speaker will have up to three minutes. People can also send written testimony to this email address so it can be included in the public record.