During a New York City Council oversight hearing on Monday, concerns over the use of artificial intelligence and biometric surveillance tools by city agencies were front and center. Lawmakers are evaluating two proposals aimed at banning biometric data collection in businesses and residential buildings throughout the city, with a notable exemption for government use. They pressed representatives from the city’s Office of Technology and Innovation (OTI) for clarity on how these technologies are deployed.
Alex Foard, assistant commissioner of research and collaboration at OTI, faced scrutiny during his testimony as he struggled to provide satisfactory answers. He acknowledged that his office does not maintain a comprehensive inventory of all biometric data collection, only tracking tools reported under Local Law 35. This 2022 regulation mandates city agencies report their use of algorithmic tools that may affect the public, such as facial recognition software.
Technology Committee Chair Carmen De La Rosa criticized OTI’s lack of transparency, linking it to a broader trend established during former Mayor Eric Adams’ administration. She noted that previous requests for information on the use of these technologies went unanswered, underscoring a pattern of obfuscation from the agency.
While Foard named three specific tools employed by city agencies that utilize biometric data — the New York City Police Department’s facial recognition technology for investigations, the Department of Investigation’s use of facial recognition in internal probes, and the Office of Chief Medical Examiner’s DNA database — he admitted that the reporting mandated by Local Law 35 may not fully capture all uses of biometric data. He expressed concern that some applications might not fall under the criteria requiring disclosure.
“I do want to indicate that agencies could be using biometric data in ways that aren’t involved in algorithmic decision making or AI or other uses, in which case we would not have visibility into that collection,” Foard stated. He added that any collection of identifying information, including biometric data, falls under the Identifying Information Law, which governs how agencies manage such data.
Despite OTI’s claims of compliance with transparency laws, council members expressed dissatisfaction with the agency’s lack of enforceable reporting standards and its overly neutral stance regarding the implications of using these technologies. This criticism was underscored by Councilmember Shahana Hanif, who cautioned that OTI’s neutrality around AI poses risks, especially given the documented racial biases in facial recognition technology.
“Knowing that technology performs unequally across race and gender, should the city view that as discriminatory?” Hanif questioned. “It seems as though the city does not have a good grasp of biometric technology, and I think taking a neutral position is quite dangerous for our city, particularly because the field of biometrics is only growing.”
Following testimony from OTI’s Foard and Lucy Joffe, the Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s deputy commissioner for policy and strategy, De La Rosa indicated that the committee would be following up with a letter requesting specific datasets and information regarding city agency use of these technologies. She emphasized the importance of transparency and urged OTI to provide any accessible information, stating, “If there are things you can give us, give them to us, and if there aren’t things that we can give them, then we could have that conversation on the side.”
In a statement released after the hearing, OTI affirmed its commitment to transparency and responsible use of AI tools. “Over the past few years, we have completed nearly all the actions described in our AI Action Plan; led agencies’ compliance with Local Law 35 requiring the disclosure of algorithmic tools that materially impact the rights, liberties, benefits, safety or interests of the public,” the agency stated. It also highlighted the recent appointment of Lisa Gelobter as the new Chief Technology Officer, bringing renewed leadership to OTI.
While De La Rosa acknowledged the challenges the agency faces due to recent leadership changes, she maintained that this should not excuse the inadequacies in providing clear answers regarding city policies on biometric data and AI. “Listen, I think that I understand that you all have just been appointed a new chief technology officer,” she remarked. “But I want to set the expectation that this committee is going to ask you all about citywide positions on things.”
The hearing highlighted the pressing need for more robust oversight and transparency as the use of artificial intelligence and biometric technologies continues to expand in New York City. With lawmakers demanding clarity and accountability, the future of these practices will likely remain a contentious topic in the city’s governance.
See also
OpenAI Revises $200M Pentagon Deal, Strengthens AI Ethical Safeguards
NationGraph Secures $18 Million to Enhance AI in US Government Contracting Sector
Federal Agencies Catalog Over 2,500 AI Applications, Boosting Operational Efficiency
OpenAI’s Joseph Larson: Infrastructure Essential for Effective Public Sector AI Use
Trump and Hegseth Target Anthropic’s AI Guardrails, Advocating for Unrestricted Development
