Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Bwc Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City auditor: Minneapolis police followed state rules on body‑worn cameras but needs stronger controls
Summary
The Office of City Auditor concluded Minneapolis Police Department complied with Minnesota law on body‑worn cameras for 2023–2024 but recommended three improvements: formal third‑party assessment reviews (SOC2/SOC3 or equivalent), formal approval and expansion of SOPs, and stronger password requirements for vendor evidence systems.
The Office of City Auditor presented its state‑mandated biennial audit of the Minneapolis Police Department’s body‑worn camera program and concluded the department complied with applicable Minnesota statutes, but recommended several steps to strengthen controls.
Siddhartha Porel, director of internal audit, told the audit committee the review covered activity from Jan. 1, 2023, through Dec. 31, 2024, and included policy and procedure reviews plus direct examination of video and related metadata in the vendor evidence system exonevidence.com. "Overall conclusion: we determined that MPD complied with state regulations related to body‑worn camera use," Porel said during the committee meeting.
The audit identified three non‑statutory recommendations to align practices with industry best practices. First, auditors recommended establishing a routine process to request and document independent third‑party assurance reports (SOC2, SOC3 or equivalent) from the vendor and to assign roles and responsibilities for reviewing those reports. Porel said the SOC2/SOC3 reports are available from the service provider but are not being reviewed periodically by the department or IT.
Second, the audit recommended that Minneapolis formally approve and further develop existing standard operating procedures (SOPs) governing body‑worn‑camera activation reviews and related processes so new and existing staff receive consistent training. The audit team reviewed an activation‑review SOP that describes reviewer roles and the use of tools such as Tableau and Smartsheets but found the SOP had not completed MPD management's formal approval process.
Third, auditors recommended strengthening password configuration requirements in the vendor system. Porel said the evidence.com application was configured with a six‑character minimum; auditors recommended increasing that minimum to at least eight characters and noted the system has the capability for a longer minimum.
The audit report stressed that these three items are recommendations to improve practices rather than violations of statute; the committee received and filed the report after questions about scope and frequency of reviews. Member Hosebein asked whether any of the work warranted a closer look in the near term; Porel responded that biennial statutory scope drove the sample period but that policy, training and footage reviews are done on an ongoing basis.
The city will publish the audit report and the auditor urged MPD to adopt the recommendations to strengthen transparency and data integrity.
The committee took no formal corrective action at the meeting beyond receiving and filing the report; the clerk was directed to file the report in the public record.
