Metro Council votes against surveillance police camera technology
The decision came after a lengthy debate that spanned over several months and was deferred twice in two separate Metro Council meetings.
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WSMV) - After several months of listening to the community and long discussions on surveillance technology in Nashville, Metro Council Members ended a discussion involving Fusus technology after more than an hour of debating.
The Metro Council decided to vote against the resolution for the approval of a contract with the vendor Fusus.
The resolution would have allowed the Metro Nashville Police Department to tap into private security cameras all over the city if the owners gave permission.
Before Tuesday night’s meeting, Mayor Freddie O’Connell made several tweets informing Nashvillians of what the Fusus technology is and a substitute that would keep MNPD held responsible if the contract is abused.
O’Connell said the following substitutes were added to the contract:
- A kill switch that would end the program if it was accessed in violation of local statute or policy
- A prohibition on facial recognition and artificial intelligence tools
- A prevention of unilateral terms of use modifications
In the last term, O’Connell said MNPD initiated a request for Fusus, however, Metro Council never fully considered it.
Instead, in 2023, Metro Council allowed for the six-month pilot program of License Plate Readers (LPRs), a similar technology to help crack down on crimes. Metro Council said they did not go forward with the LPRs due to them being in communities of minority.
However, in May 2024, Mayor Freddie O’Connell said LPRs could make a return. MNPD repeated the request for Fusus, and the resolution was filed on Oct. 8.
It was deferred in two council meetings.
Before the debate among council members, community members shared their concerns for and against the technology.
“I’m here to join dozens of other constituents that are worried about the Fusus surveillance system,” Nashville resident Macy Fluharty said.
Some like Fluharty spoke out at Tuesday night’s Metro Council meeting pushing against the technology while others like Verna Wyatt pushed for it.
“I think this technology is a no-brainer,” Wyatt said.
Fluharty said she came to multiple council meetings to speak up for those who couldn’t make it to the meetings.
“There is just a lot of constituents like myself that worry about what this type of mass surveillance can do, using public and private cameras and half of them we might not even know are registered since they’re private cameras,” Fluharty said.
Someone speaking during the public comment period shared the following message:
“There seem to be too many unanswered questions about Fusus at this time. There are lots of questions that we don’t know the answers and a cancellation clause is good, but what’s even better is having policy and protocols in place beforehand.”
For those like Wyatt, many believed the benefit of Fusus could have been worth it.
“I know how important it is to find the bad guy,” Wyatt said. “In my case, my sister-in-law was abducted, and we didn’t find her for three days. If there had been cameras there, he was a repeat rapist, maybe if they had found what he had done the first time, Martha would have been spared,” Wyatt said.
In opposition to what Wyatt said, Fluharty shared her thoughts on the subject of Fusus technology.
“I think these amendments are in good faith, but we really have to keep in mind what our power is,” Fluharty said.
Copyright 2024 WSMV. All rights reserved.
