Flock Safety License Plate Cameras Deployed Without Adequate Disclosure at US Universities and Cities
Multiple US cities deployed Flock Safety automated license plate reading cameras for law enforcement without adequate public notice or transparency about data collection and access policies. Community members and civil liberties advocates raised concerns about indiscriminate surveillance, potential misuse, and insufficient oversight, citing cases where the technology was used for purposes beyond public safety.
What happened
The University of Arizona Police Department installed more than 50 automated license plate reading cameras produced by Flock Safety on and around campus without adequate notice to students or faculty. The cameras are mounted on light poles and fixtures to collect license plate information.
Students and faculty leadership reported they were unaware of the cameras' existence. Faculty Senate Chair Leila Hudson stated: 'To be frank, I had no knowledge of these, nor any understanding of this before it was brought to my attention by community members.' Concerns were raised about transparency regarding contracts, data collection, and guardrails.
Kalamazoo installed Flock cameras in 2021 to address gun violence. The city initially restricted outside agency access in early 2024, citing concerns about whether queries aligned with city values, but later reinstated external access.
Reported impact
Community members expressed concerns about indiscriminate data collection, stating 'the cameras sweep up data indiscriminately, recording every vehicle that passes' without warrants, consent, or community knowledge. Some students questioned whether border enforcement agencies had accessed data collected by the university's cameras.
Residents in multiple cities called for removal of Flock cameras, citing potential misuse. A case in Texas was cited where police used Flock's network to search for a woman in connection with an abortion, with the search log reason listed as 'had an abortion, search for female.'
Index analysis
The deployments highlight tensions between law enforcement's use of surveillance technology for crime prevention and community concerns about data collection without adequate transparency or oversight. The indiscriminate capture of vehicle data creates a 'digital map' accessible to multiple agencies, raising questions about data governance and acceptable use policies.
Flock Safety's statement that data is 'automatically deleted after 30 days, by default' and that third-party access requires prior approval does not address community concerns about the scope of collection, the potential for misuse before deletion, or the adequacy of access controls.
Governance controls
UAPD stated the system operates under 'established protocols that comply with privacy laws and regulations' with records deleted after 30 days and third-party access prohibited without prior approval or court order. Flock Safety declined to disclose specifics about camera locations, installation dates, or contract details.
Kalamazoo restricted external agency access in early 2024 based on concerns about alignment with city values, but reinstated external access at a later date without public disclosure of the policy reversal or the criteria for doing so.
Classification
Sources and evidence
Sources not yet published
This record was researched and written by the Index from original reporting. Its sources are still being verified by an editor, and they are listed here once that check is complete. Until then the record carries no reviewer.