HOULTON, Maine — Just days after Houlton suspended its townwide surveillance camera system, the town’s police chief said in a court proceeding Monday that he was aware the cameras were equipped with facial recognition technology.
While Chief of Police Tim DeLuca did not provide many more details about the program, that admission matters because some residents have raised concerns about the legality of Houlton’s surveillance system, given that Maine passed a law in 2021 sharply limiting the ability of governments to use facial recognition technology.
Local officials had not previously said whether they knew about the facial recognition technology on the cameras. However, while DeLuca has previously said the town used the cameras, it is still not clear whether it ever used their facial recognition technology.
DeLuca’s testimony came during a civil trial in Aroostook Superior Court related to a lawsuit a resident, Craig Harriman, filed against the town alleging failure to comply with the state’s Freedom of Access Act laws.
During the trial, DeLuca initially denied any knowledge of the surveillance program’s policies or details, or the cameras’ technology.
“I have no idea. It was not my project,” DeLuca said while testifying.
But in response to questions from Harriman, the police chief admitted knowledge of the camera’s ability to filter people on camera through clothing and facial matches.
“Is that a feature that the Houlton Police Communications Department has?” Harriman asked, referring to the cameras’ facial surveillance technology.
“Yes,” DeLuca said.
“Do any of the other cameras purchased with the American Rescue Plan Act fund use any type of machine learning, artificial intelligence, any type of software features that collect or gather data by facial recognition?” Harriman asked.
“Yes,” DeLuca said.
Under a 2021 Maine facial recognition law, it is illegal for public officials or departments to obtain, retain, possess or access a facial surveillance system or information derived from one unless the use falls into one of a few exceptions.
Those exceptions include when the footage is required to investigate a serious crime, to help identify deceased individuals or to help locate a missing or endangered person, according to Michael Kebede, policy director with the Maine chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Even in those cases, the municipality must first request permission from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles or the Maine State Police to access the data, depending on the case or crime, Kebede has previously said.
According to the Maine State Police, from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31 of last year, the Houlton Police Department, the town of Houlton, or the Houlton Department of Public Works did not request permission to access facial recognition technology, according to information the Bangor Daily News obtained through a FOAA request.
A FOAA request for copies of similar records from the Maine Bureau of Motor Vehicles is still pending.
During Monday’s trial, DeLuca said that he is not currently responsible for granting access to the images collected by the town’s cameras, adding that it would fall under the town manager’s responsibilities. But he also admitted that while serving as acting town manager in 2024, he was responsible for granting access to the cameras’ images.
DeLuca was the interim town manager from November 2023 through April 2024.
Previously, in a 2024 response to a BDN FOAA request, DeLuca said that the cameras were monitored in the police department communications center and that they were used as a law enforcement tool.
On Saturday, the town’s new interim town manager, Cameron Clark, said he was temporarily disconnecting the townwide surveillance cameras until officials could investigate their compliance with Maine law. That came a day after the BDN sent a series of questions about the surveillance program.
Clark again announced the temporary suspension of the system during Monday night’s Town Council meeting.
Harriman, who represented himself in Monday’s trial, filed suit against the town after repeated requests for documents and data regarding the surveillance cameras allegedly went unanswered.
Following over an hour of testimony by DeLuca and Houlton Town Clerk Kylee Wampler, District Court Judge Robert Langner reviewed the evidence before determining that because most of the documents were eventually provided to Harriman, the town did not violate the state’s FOAA laws.
However, Langner noted that the town did not initially respond to Harriman written queries for the records. He also found the surveillance camera system was not an initiative solely of the Houlton Police Dept. Langner did not specify who else shared that responsibility.
“I do not think that the town ever meant to deny Mr. Harriman access to any particular records that he requested,” Langner said. “They were not hiding the ball, so to speak.”
After the trial, Harriman said that he respects the judge’s ruling. “It was a great opportunity to have testimony taken under oath,” he said. “It will be very interesting to see if or when the facial recognition technology was ever turned on and by what user.”
