The NYPD, which is legally required to share information about its surveillance techniques with the public, is using such vague language in its reporting that it’s hard to tell what tools are being used, a new report found.

The Office of the Inspector General for the NYPD, which is tasked with auditing the police surveillance program, said in a report released Thursday that police are technically meeting the requirements of a 2020 law intended to increase oversight of the department’s surveillance program. But it added that police are not being as transparent as lawmakers had hoped when they passed the bill in 2020.

For example, the department grouped technologies together in broad categories— like “audiovisual recording devices, overt” and “video-only recording devices, covert” — instead of creating individual policies for each unique surveillance technology. For example, the report notes, there is no separate policy for Digidog, a dog-shaped robot with microphones and cameras that the NYPD has used on multiple occasions. That means the NYPD could implement new surveillance tools without alerting the public or explaining how they will be used.

The report noted that the police department did not disclose which outside agencies can access surveillance data. It also criticized the NYPD for neglecting to include an analysis of the potential disparate impact of the technology’s use on protected groups in many of its policies. Research has found that technologies like facial recognition can disproportionately target people of color, because its algorithms are poorly trained to recognize nonwhite faces.

“They have all of these ways that they are reading the law that violate any common-sense understanding of what this bill requires,” said Albert Cahn, executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, which advocated for the legislation.

The 73-page document is the OIG’s first analysis of the police department’s surveillance practices since the New York City Council passed the POST Act, which requires the NYPD to create and publish policies for all of its surveillance technologies. It also requires an annual audit of those policies. First introduced in 2018, then-Mayor Bill de Blasio signed it into law in July 2020, as part of a package of police reform legislation enacted after the murder of George Floyd.

Since then, the NYPD has published policies for 36 different types of surveillance on its website, including the Criminal Group Database (also known as the Gang Database), cryptocurrency analysis tools, facial recognition and ShotSpotter. These policies include multiple legally mandated sections, including explanations of how the technologies work, safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to data, and how long data will be stored.

In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for the NYPD said the department appreciates the role of the OIG-NYPD and "remains committed to working collaboratively toward our shared goal of enhancing public safety as we build stronger relationships with the communities we serve.” A spokesperson also said the department is “proud that this report shows that the NYPD has complied with the POST Act’s requirements to produce and publish impact and use policies for each of the technologies utilized.”

The report included 15 recommendations to increase transparency for police surveillance, including:

  • Publishing a separate policy for each surveillance tool that it uses
  • Including in each policy an analysis of how the technology could impact vulnerable groups differently
  • Convening a working group with police, members of the City Council, community members, and advocates with expertise in surveillance technologies to make their own recommendations to improve the department’s surveillance policies
  • Conducting regular audits of the NYPD’s facial recognition technology
  • Providing the OIG with an itemized list of every surveillance tool the department is currently using or has recently discontinued each quarter

The NYPD has a long history of surveillance, from its monitoring of Black Panthers in the 1970s and Muslims after 9/11 to its more recent tracking of Black Lives Matter protesters. Ibrahim Bechrouri, an adjunct lecturer at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said NYPD surveillance dates back to at least the early 20th century, when officers monitored different ethnic groups. He said the strategy continues to take a disproportionate toll on those who are “less privileged.”

“Not everybody sees surveillance as a good thing. Not everybody sees police presence as a good thing,” Bechrouri said. “Depending on your experiences with the police, on historical experience of your communities with the police, you’ll have a different approach to that, a different feeling toward that.”

The report comes at a time when fears of surging crime have fueled political rhetoric and caused apprehension among some New Yorkers. While homicides and shootings are both down citywide, police say reports of most major crimes are up. Gov. Kathy Hochul announced in September that the state plans to spend $5.5 million to install two surveillance cameras on every subway car — 13,000 in total.

“You think Big Brother is watching you on the subways, you’re absolutely right. That is our intent,” the governor said at the time. “If you’re concerned about this, best answer is don’t commit any crimes on the subways.”

Cahn warned that the prevalence of surveillance could actually make people less safe.

“Surveillance is power, and when we let that surveillance go unchecked, when we let police decide what to use and when to use it, we give them a level of power that isn’t compatible with democracy,” he said. “Whether it’s tracking political protests, tracking faith communities or even tracking abortion in a post-Dobbs America, this police surveillance state is a tool that can be weaponized against any of us, if we fall into disfavor with officers.”