Privacy pushback prompts two cities to drop Flock Safety license plate cameras

Privacy concerns and disagreements over data control have led police departments in Los Angeles and Westland, Michigan, to terminate their agreements with Flock Safety, a private company that operates automated license plate reader cameras. The moves highlight a growing backlash against surveillance technology that critics say tracks more than just stolen vehicles.

The Los Angeles Police Department ended its three-year agreement with the Atlanta-based firm on July 11, the Los Angeles Times reported. The contract, signed in July 2023, gave the LAPD 138 pole-mounted cameras across the city. According to KTLA, Flock Safety said the suspension came as a "surprise." Westland, Michigan, will remove its 10 cameras when its contract expires at the end of the month, following resident criticism and a split among city leaders, WDIV ClickOnDetroit reported.

2 sources

WDIV ClickOnDetroitWestland to remove Flock safety license plate cameras after privacy concernsKTLAFlock Safety says LAPD halting the use of their license plate readers was a ‘surprise’

"LAPD Suspends Ties with Anti-Crime License-Plate Camera Vendor over Disagreement as to 'Who Owns the Data'"

The core dispute centers on data ownership and access. Breitbart reported that the LAPD and Flock Safety disagreed over who should control the footage. The Los Angeles Times added that Flock Safety faced criticism for sharing data with state and federal agencies, and advocacy groups raised alarms that the data could support immigration enforcement efforts under President Trump. Meanwhile, PCMag noted that the cameras "know where you sleep, work, and shop," raising broader surveillance concerns.

PCMagMore Like Stalking Than Security: The Quiet Threat of License Plate Cameras

Beyond privacy, the technology's effectiveness in policing has been questioned. The LAPD's cameras were designed to track stolen vehicles and fugitives, but the data-sharing practices drew opposition from civil liberties groups. In Westland, the split among city leaders mirrored national debates over the balance between public safety and individual privacy. The decisions by both cities signal that local governments are increasingly scrutinizing surveillance partnerships with private firms.

"They know where you sleep, work, and shop. Did you know that all those cameras you see on street corners in your neighborhood aren't owned (and in some cases, aren't monitored) by your local government or police department?"

The LAPD and Westland are not alone in rethinking such arrangements. As communities weigh the trade-offs, the Flock Safety case underscores a broader reckoning over how much surveillance is acceptable in public spaces. With contracts ending and tensions over data ownership unresolved, the future of automated license plate reader programs in American cities remains uncertain.