Cities reverse course on automated license plate reader cameras amid privacy concerns

Cambridge, Massachusetts officials turned off 16 automated license plate reader cameras (ALPR) last week after the city council voted to pause their use following reports of the cameras’ manufacturer sharing data with immigration authorities.

Cambridge is one of several cities where the Flock Safety cameras — which are now present in thousands of cities across the country — have recently been taken offline. 

On October 14, Eugene, Oregon officials disabled 57 cameras there after the City Council voted to pause their use following an intense backlash from residents. Officials in Austin, Texas ended their contract with Flock in June amid similar public objections. In August, Evanston, Illinois deactivated 19 cameras.

The move by cities to halt their work with Flock follows reports that the company shared data from local partners with federal immigration authorities. Residents in all cities which have disabled the cameras had fought their use.

A Cambridge City Councilor, Patty Nolan, said she is concerned by reports that police in Texas used data from Flock cameras in several jurisdictions to track a woman who self-administered an abortion as part of a criminal investigation. Councilors also were alarmed by use of camera data for immigration arrests, she said.

“Flock data has been used and requisitioned by federal immigration officials for work that I don't want us to be cooperating on,” Nolan said. “It's not our job to do their work.”

Cambridge officials and the City Council are currently reviewing Flock’s data practices and the city’s contract with the firm and will determine soon if the city will end its contract with the ALPR manufacturer. Nolan said the vote to pause the contract was unanimous and that councilors are focused on understanding what guardrails are in place to prevent Flock from sharing data from the city with outside agencies.

She said she also has seen no evidence that use of Flock cameras reduces crime.

Police in some jurisdictions have fought to continue using the cameras. 

The police chief in Eugene told the public that the Flock cameras played a pivotal role in investigating a series of burglaries targeting Asian business owners for which officers had recently made arrests.

“The ALPR technology was a critical investigative tool in providing a turning point to help solve this case,” Eugene Police Chief Chris Skinner said in a prepared statement on October 10. “This is an example of how this technology can serve victims of crime in a more effective and efficient way.”

Evanston officials have said they decided to turn off their Flock cameras after a state audit revealed the company had shared city residents’ license plate data with federal authorities in violation of state law.

“The findings of the Illinois Secretary of State’s audit, combined with Flock’s admission that it failed to establish distinct permissions and protocols to ensure local compliance while running a pilot program with federal users, are deeply troubling,” a city of Evanston press release said.

The company reportedly later reinstalled cameras in Evanston, leading officials there to cover them in plastic bags so they would not work.

A Flock spokesperson declined to comment about the Evanston allegations.

In Denver, residents and city councilors are now fighting Mayor Mike Johnston over plans to continue the city’s contract with Flock.

Flock is not trustworthy, City Council Member-at-Large Sarah Parady said. Police officials there have said they were unaware that the company shared Denver’s data with law enforcement in outside jurisdictions, she said. Such sharing is especially concerning to Parady because many women from Texas come to Colorado to obtain legal abortions.

A spokesperson for Johnston did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Parady said she also worries about federal immigration authorities using Flock data to seize undocumented people. Even if Flock data were not being shared with outside agencies, however, Paraday said she still opposes their use because of how Flock trains its AI to predict people’s patterns of travel.

“That kind of surveillance is not something that a human mind looking at physical images or looking at a car driving by could do by itself, and so it's really come a very long way from the Fourth Amendment doctrine of kind of plain view searches and the idea that you don't have any expectation that your photograph won't be taken in public,” Parady said.

“It's hard for me to believe that you don't have a privacy right not to have an algorithm basically track you everywhere that you go.”