Greenwood City Council, city residents discuss use of Flock system - Talk Business & Politics
The city of Greenwood’s use of automated license plate reader (LPR) cameras – commonly known as Flock cameras – and constitutional rights was the topic of a three-plus hour exchange. . .
Thecity of Greenwood’suse of automated license plate reader (LPR) cameras – commonly known as Flock cameras – and constitutional rights was the topic of a three-plus hour exchange of information Monday (Aug. 10) during a Greenwood City Council special meeting. The council is expected to consider policy around the use of such cameras during a Sept. 14 regular meeting. Many police stations across the state and country utilize LPR cameras to photograph vehicles and license plates that pass on public roadways. The data, which often is not stored for more than 30 days, can be used to help solve crimes or locate missing persons. However, pushback is growing nationwide against use of the cameras, with most citing violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution – the right against unlawful searches and seizures – as a reason to remove or ban the cameras. OPPOSITIONThe city of Pea Ridge in Northwest Arkansas and the city of Mayflower in central Arkansas recently ended use of their Flock system. “The Mayflower Police Department will not participate in tactics which compromise or infringe upon liberties entitled to law-abiding citizens,” noted part of the city’s statement. There also are concerns with city’s using Flock data to help federal agencies conduct immigration-related searches. Several communities nationwide have ended use of the system or significantly restructured use after learning about “back doors” used by other law enforcement agencies to retrieve system data. The state of New Hampshire has a three-minute data deletion rule that prevents storage and future use of information collected by the system. DeFlock, a national group founded in October 2024 by software engineer Will Freeman, helps people learn more about the use of LPR systems and how to remove or restrict their use. “These cameras collect data on millions of vehicles regardless of whether the driver is suspected of a crime,” according to DeFlock. “These systems are marketed as indispensable tools to fight crime, but they ignore the powerful tools police already have to track criminals, such as cell phone location data, creating a loophole that doesn’t require a warrant. ”FLOCK USE IN GREENWOODThe issue recently drew the attention of Greenwood residents when they learned the city purchased the cameras in 2022. The city has installed 11 LPRs around the city. Five of the 11 are paid for by the Greenwood Public School District to cover areas around the schools. Greenwood Chief of Police Brad Hobbs said after the meeting that the city pays approximately $13,000 a year — for a total of $65,000 over five years — for use of the cameras. Mayor Doug Kinslow said the city has the Flock system because the cost was included as a line item in the 2022 budget passed by the city council. Atlanta-basedFlockreports having its cameras and system used by more than 6,000 communities and more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide. When pressed by audience members if he knew what the system was at the time, Kinslow said, “I did not know what we were looking at,” Kinslow said Tuesday when he was asked by an audience member if he knew what system was being used. He would later note in the meeting, “On the side of protecting my family, I think it’s a great tool. ”Ian Leslie, a regional public affairs manager for Flock Safety, said during the meeting that LPRs only capture still photos of the backs of vehicles, such as the license plate, make, model, and other vehicle characteristics. “It does not capture any personal identifiable information,” he said. “It is not building a personal profile on anybody that is driving by. ”The system integrates with so-called hot lists, such as the National Crime Information Center database and Amber Alerts, Leslie said. A police department is then notified within 20 seconds if a specific vehicle that passed by an LPR camera is potentially connected to a crime, he said. Once police are notified of a possible connection, police then investigate. “A Flock alert is not judge and executioner,” Leslie said. After Leslie’s presentation, the council opened the meeting for public comment. Approximately 50 members of the public attended, with the council expanding public comment from five minutes to seven minutes for each person. More than 15 citizens signed up to speak. Almost all of public comments were against the use of the system, with one person handing out “No Flock on my block” documents. Some speakers confused the Flock system used by Greenwood with other systems sold by Flock. POLICE REPORTAfter more than 90 minutes of public comment, Hobbs provided information he collected after a recent meeting with constituents. He said when he began preparing for his presentation about the city’s use of the system, he thought he would have to defend the city’s use. “But the more I studied the issue, the more I realized I don’t have to defend it; the debate has already taken place,” Hobbs said. “Attorneys on both sides have argued it, privacy advocates have challenged it, state legislators have debated it, and judges across this country from the Pacific coast to the Atlantic coast have examined the constitutional questions surrounding this technology. Courts have repeatedly upheld the lawful use of License Plate Readers when appropriate for legitimate law enforcement uses. ”Hobbs also provided information about three crimes in Greenwood for which the cameras assisted. Hobbs said he has limited the number of officers who can input information into the system to two, requiring them to seek supervisor approval first. Hobbs also said he ordered an audit of the department’s use of the system, which found there was no evidence of misuse. He also developed a system policy that has been presented to the city attorney for review. Hobbs also said a transparency portal showing Flock data has been added to the police department’s webpage. City Attorney Travis Plummer, who presented a 19-page legal memorandum on the issue, supports use of the system. His memo cited court cases, limitations regarding the use of LPRs, an Arkansas State Police rule, guardrails in place to protect an overreach of government use, and a risk analysis for the use of the cameras. “Arkansas has enacted specific ALPR limits,” the memo noted. “Greenwood’s defense rests on demonstrated compliance: short retention, documented law-enforcement purpose, audit logs, restricted sharing, and human confirmation before any stop. … The city is not asking residents to choose between safety and privacy. The lawful program is a limited public-safety tool governed by written rules, oversight, and consequences for misuse. ”Related