Durham council pauses Peregrine police data contract after public privacy concerns

Durham City Council on Oct. 23 agreed to carry the proposed contract with Peregrine Technologies back to staff after residents and council members raised concerns about privacy, cross‑agency data sharing and potential civil‑rights impacts.

The referral came after multiple in‑person and online speakers said the platform would consolidate existing police data — body camera footage, ALPR records, CAD and RMS entries, digital evidence and social media — into a single searchable environment that they feared could be used for real‑time tracking or shared with outside agencies. “This platform will consolidate data from police reports, body cameras, digital evidence, ALPRs, call records, mobile pings, and social media,” resident Rainer Usenco (identified in public comment) said, cautioning that the city had not sufficiently engaged the public on risks and controls.

Durham Police and city officials said the system would not introduce investigative tools the department does not already use and that any access would be governed by existing Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) requirements, audit trails and agency vetting. “This is not software that anyone can just come in and wantonly Google anyone,” the police chief said during the meeting, adding that the tool is intended to accelerate investigators’ ability to gather and correlate information they already hold.

Council members on both sides of the issue asked for more time and clarity. Several asked staff to provide written responses on vendor data‑retention and third‑party‑access policies, whether the vendor has ties to other defense or surveillance companies, and how artificial‑intelligence features would be used. Council member Baker asked specifically whether the vendor’s contract clauses protect against compelled or automatic data sharing with federal agencies; council member Caballero asked for meetings with immigration‑lawyers and other community stakeholders.

City Manager Ferguson recommended and council accepted referring the item to staff so that the city can convene additional public meetings, collect written vendor responses and return with a revised agenda item. The council explicitly removed the item from the Nov. 3 agenda and directed staff to schedule multiple engagement sessions (including at times and locations accessible to affected communities) and to provide a written record of responses before the council considers any contract award.

What happens next: Staff will gather council questions and vendor responses, schedule further community meetings and prepare a future agenda item that addresses access controls, data‑sharing limits, CJIS compliance, and any contract language governing third‑party requests. The chief and city manager said they would meet with Durham Beyond Policing and local immigrant‑rights attorneys to discuss concerns and that the vendor would be available for public sessions.

The referral does not change existing police practices; it pauses only council action on a vendor contract while staff and the community seek more information.