Aurora considering fines for parents of juvenile dirt bike riders, facial recognition use by police

AURORA | Aurora parents could face fines of $250 or more if they let their kids drive so-called dirt bikes on city streets and property and city lawmakers approve the fines.

The measure, slated for final consideration by the Aurora City Council Monday night, adds a section to city laws making it illegal for parents or guardians to “knowingly permit anyone under 18 to operate or ride an off-highway vehicle in violation of existing city restrictions.”

Dubbed “dirt bikes,” the small, motorized cycles are intended for off-road recreation. Most do not meet minimum street-regulations, but minors are prohibited from driving any motorized vehicles on city streets and public roads without a valid driver’s license.

Parents who plead or are found guilty of the proposed measure would face a minimum fine of $250, according to the bill language. The new measure would levy penalties separate from those imposed for infractions by the minor dirt-bike driver.

City officials said in legislation details that the proposed change was prompted by a rise in accidents and injuries tied to dirt-bike riding by minors in Aurora and the surrounding region. Many of the complaints have surfaced in southeast Aurora, city officials say.

Despite current prohibitions on off-highway vehicle use in city streets, sidewalks, open spaces and business areas, officials said minors continue to ride with little resistance.

Also up for consideration during a study session Monday night, Aurora Police are asking city lawmakers permission to use facial recognition software and systems to help identify suspects and solve crimes.

“This is very much what we do now, just relying on human recognition,” Police Commander Chris Poppe of Aurora’s District 3 said during a council committee meeting in September. “We’re just going to use software to do that now.”

The systems and philosophy of government using the software has long been peppered with criticism by critics who say the technology can result in grievous errors and has resulted in civil rights abuses around the globe. Proponents say it could be a huge boon in quickly identifying suspects before they get away.

As required by state law, Aurora police officials are asking city leaders to authorize the use of facial recognition technology, a step that would formalize a program the department has already been building for nearly three years, according to Poppe.

Poppe described it as a “deliberate and paced” effort shaped by state regulations, outside consultants and national best-practice standards.

“We’re hoping to enhance productivity, increase crime solvability and ultimately just make the community safer,” Poppe said. “The more efficient we are at solving crimes, the safer Aurora will be.”

If city lawmakers eventually approve the request, facial recognition would be added to the department’s existing biometric tools, such as DNA and fingerprinting, Poppe said. Investigators often collect video or still images from doorbell cameras, as well as those from businesses or city cameras, if individuals and businesses are willing to provide them, Poppe said. Currently, those images are circulated through bulletins or Crime Stoppers, with the hope that someone will recognize the suspect.

Now, the police department is hoping to utilize software as an additional tool for this purpose. If approved, they will be able to take an image and compare it to a “volume of images” that they already have, like mugshots, or from the internet, including social media pictures, Poppe said.

Aurora police propose using two widespread systems, Lumen and Clearview AI, Poppe said. 

Lumen is a statewide database of mugshots from Colorado jails, with which the city already partners. Clearview AI is a private company that scrapes publicly available images from social media and the internet.

Both systems would be used only after investigators establish reasonable suspicion in an ongoing case, he said. Matches generated by the software would be treated only as investigative leads, not as probable cause for arrest.

Missteps in other cities have led to wrongful arrests, he said.

“It’s a tip,” he said. “It does not establish probable cause.” 

Using facial recognition has been controversial for several years, with some critics claiming that people of color have a higher rate of misidentification than white people. The aspect that seems to be stressed most by lawmakers and police departments is that it cannot be used as singular evidence, as was the case in a 2023 incident involving a man named Randal Quran Reid in Georgia, who was held in jail for six days after being misidentified by facial recognition technology.

Critics also have concerns about civil liberty and privacy regarding the technology, and some groups like the ACLU have asked police departments to stop using it altogether, like in Detroit, after an eight-month pregnant Black woman was held in jail for hours after being misidentified for a robbery and carjacking. 

In 2022, the Colorado Legislature established guidelines for the use of facial recognition by police, requiring agencies to adopt policies, submit accountability reports and obtain approval from their governing bodies, Poppe said. 

The city council must formally approve the request for implementation at a future city council meeting, if the issue is moved past Monday’s study session.