Rafael: Good evening and welcome to MetroFocus, I am Rafael P Romano.

Are we in New York City or in Star Wars?

A question New Yorkers might be asking themselves when they see some of the new robots the NYPD has been rolling out.

In a recent event held at Times Square, the mayor announced the return of digidog, the controversial robot canceled in 2021 after serious backlash from a number of civil rights groups.

The robotic unit and other policing related technologies have become the latest tension point in the fight over police spending and public safety.

The State Senator is one of the elected officials who has been arguing against the NYPD's use of robots for surveillance and crime prevention.

And he joins us now.

>> Thank you for having me.

Rafael: The mayor has introduced several new pieces of technology which will be used by the NYPD.

There is digidog, we have two of those, they will be used in high-risk circumstances like bomb threats or hostage situations.

There is star Chase, a GPS tracker that can be shot at take fleeing vehicle -- at a fleeing vehicle, and a Roman robot shooting and taking video footage and otherwise acting as a kind of deterrent to crime.

Before we get into the specifics of each of these technologies, you have been critical and admonished the use of these technologies for policing purposes.

Generally, could you tell us why, could you summarize your position?

>> The police and NYPD are overfunded and they abuse the tools that they have already.

They abuse them for surveillance and other means already.

Any expansion of tools that they have under their belt we can assume that they will abuse as well.

Rafael: OK, we'll get back -- into the bigger picture.

But let's talk about these three technologies specifically, one at a time.

As I said, this dog has been here before, it was first used during the de Blasio administration, where it was deployed in housing to the great display of digital rock -- civil rights advocates, including you.

What was the problem?

>> The problem was that this was a way to engage in surveillance of public housing residents which did not make them feel safer and did not make them safer.

If you want an investment, the thing that they want is better lighting.

Infrastructure investments into their community as opposed to robotic surveillance dogs.

Rafael: >> But that's not how it is going to be used now.

The intention now, is to use it in emergency situations much like the fire department, who has its own Digidog, recently after the collapse of that parking garage in lower Manhattan.

The mayor has said that it will be used in those emergencies where otherwise the lives of officers might be at risk.

Under these circumstances, do you accept it?

>> I think we should consider this an attempt to get ready for a wider usage of these robots.

And these surveillance techniques.

Even something as innocuous as a camera, police have used them to do illegal surveillance of Muslims after 9/11.

I don't think we should take it at face value that these will be limited in scope.

Rafael: You feel like there will be a slippery slope, that if you introduce this technology, inevitably they will veer off and perform other functions, nefarious or sinister functions, that they were not intended to be used for initially?

Ask you know, we have this propensity from the mayor to engage in technical solution is him -- technosolutionism, you robots to address issues that have more community-based solutions.

Rafael: Let's move onto star Chase, something that really sounds like its out of Star Wars.

This is a new GPS tracker that can be shot at a fleeing vehicle, either through a handheld or vehicle mounted launcher.

The expectation is that it will significantly reduce the speed -- high-speed chases, which have also caused civilian fatalities.

What's the problem with that?

Rafael: The NYPD is, in surveillance -- well-known to engage in surveillance of people who have not been convicted of a crime or engaged in anything illegal, and they profile people.

What is to stop them from surveilling cars is the simple fact that there proof -- from the civil fact that they profiling the driver?

Rafael: You fear that they will shoot this GPS at innocent bystanders or civilians and their cars.

I'm guessing I can guess what your response to -- will be two K5--- K-five, that robot that will roam the subway station taking video footage.

But it does not have facial recognition cap abilities.

Does that make a difference?

Rafael: -- >> The biggest issue with engaging with police budgets, its similar to putting more police agents into the subways when the actual meat of investment is faster service, reopening the public bathrooms and reducing fairs and making them free.

It is a misplaced use of funds to do not address the root cause or needs in our communities.

Rafael: But the funds paying for this are going to be the assets, the funds from the assets of convicted criminals are those funds already dedicated for these kinds of purposes or policing purposes >> You know, I would say that with this NYPD budget, this is a real opportunity for people to see what they actually do.

That they engage in tech toys to fight for deeper surveillance of people who, and we are talking about innocent people, who are being recorded and surveilled by the NYPD.

And who knows what they will do with that information.

For small children, they have used these game trucks to collect DNA from children.

I think people should be wary, of any increases of the NYPD to engage in deeper surveillance of innocent civilians.

Rafael: Times Square subway station is a public space, and it already has a lot of cameras recording, some people would argue that these are just more cameras.

What is the difference between the cameras that already exist in Times Square and these cameras as far as collecting information?

>> It is an expansion that is unnecessary.

It has not been clear what these out onto already have -- add on to all the things we have, and how it will make people safer.

Rafael: You've touched on it a number of times briefly in our conversation so far, could you explicitly tell us where you think your money should go to the NYPD or policing that is going to this instead?

>> I think the general NYPD budget should be decreased.

So that we can allocate that money into things that make us safer like education, affordable housing, mental health services.

Rafael: Earlier this year, you introduced a bill in Albany that deals specifically with the issues we are talking about, not the specific technologies but things used by the police around the state.

What does that entail, that legislation, and how does that affect the things we have been talking about?

>> That went band police departments from using any robots that are armed and can be armed or that engage in surveillance.

We introduce it shortly after the first Digidog started patrolling in development's a couple years ago.

We have introduced it and are promoting it now in the wake of the new announcement from the mayor and the NYPD.

Rafael: Are you getting a lot of people to sign off on it or do you expect that it will pass and that there will be a law?

>> We have gotten a lot of interest in the bill and expect to pass it before the end of the legislative session.

>> In 2020, the city Council passed the police oversight surveillance technology act to ensure transparency in police use of technology.

Where is that lacking in why is that not sufficient to do with the issues we are talking about?

>> The passage of that bill was critical to knowing what surveillance the NYPD is currently engaging in, and now that we know we can work to stop surveillance of our communities.

Rafael: So in the minute and a half that we have, what are some of the critical steps that you believe we should take and the city government should take, that Albany should take, in order to invest in policing and in public safety in the right way.

>> There are many things that come to people's minds when they think of what would make them safer.

For one thing I hear people wishing that they had better lighting on their block.

That is a straight up investment that everyone agrees on.

But then in terms of quality of life people wish that we were doing more for the homeless and making sure that they have supportive housing and that we have more mental health beds and helping mental health in our communities.

People strongly believe in education and ensuring that more social and emotional training and education is done in our schools.

And jobs, can't find enough jobs, especially youth jobs, so that people have a livelihood that they can depend on.

Rafael: All right, we have to ended there.

Thank you so much for joining us and sharing your thoughts with us on this issue.

We hope to see you again soon.

>> Thank you so much, Rafael.