Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
Cambridge hits pause on license plate cameras amid privacy concerns
City officials voted to suspend the Flock Safety system while they review data-sharing practices with law enforcement.
Just months after approving them, the Cambridge City Council voted unanimously Monday to pause the city’s use of Flock Safety license plate reader cameras, citing growing concerns over privacy and data sharing.
Flock Safety turned off the 16 cameras installed in the city on Tuesday, after the council unanimously voted to suspend their use.
The cameras were installed in September, following a 6-3 vote to approve the use of the technology in February.
The City Council revisited the issue after strong public feedback from residents, the ACLU, and the nonprofit Digital Fourth, which advocates for privacy and surveillance reform.
Advertisement:
They raised concerns that the company shares license plate data in a national database accessible to law enforcement agencies nationwide.
Documents obtained by the ACLU of Massachusetts show that police across the state are tracking drivers’ locations and sharing that data with more than 7,000 agencies nationwide — including some in states that restrict abortion, ban gender-affirming care for minors, or require local police to enforce immigration laws.
According to 404 Media, one example of misuse occurred when a Texas law enforcement agency used Flock’s national database to track a woman who allegedly self-administered an abortion. The agency reportedly lied to access Massachusetts data to get her location.
Advertisement:
404 Media also reports that some local police have searched Flock on behalf of ICE agents.
“What I’m really hearing is that the most criticism is of the company Flock,” said City Councilor Paul Toner, who wanted to give the police department time to investigate the accusations against the company.
“Technology can be very useful, but at this time it can be misused and terribly dangerous,” City Councilor Marc McGovern said.
In response to the decision, Flock Safety stated it will work closely with the city to provide information or support during this review process.
“The allegations about Flock’s relationship with federal agencies are untrue — these questions have been addressed and, in some cases, … have led to improvements in our products,” the Flock statement said.
Police Commissioner Christine Elow said the department intends to use the technology for legitimate public safety purposes, such as locating stolen vehicles, investigating violent crimes, and improving traffic safety.
However, questions regarding data privacy have arisen, leading to an audit of the department’s use, as outlined in a letter to the council.
Elow said she is open to exploring ways of using license plate reader cameras responsibly while they “figure out how to protect our community from overreach from our federal government.”
Advertisement:
Cambridge Police Department Superintendent Peter Vellucci said a federal grant covered half the $48,000 cost of the surveillance program — about $24,000 — and the city paid the remaining half to fund 16 cameras.
The council voted to refer the issue to the Public Safety Committee, and the City Council will need to take a future vote on whether to turn on the cameras again or not.
The concerns in Cambridge follow those in Illinois, where the secretary of state said the company shared data violating state law and terminated its contracts with Flock Safety.
After Evanston, Illinois, ordered Flock Safety to stop using the license plate reader cameras, Flock reinstalled them without their permission, prompting Evanston to cover them with plastic sheeting.
Eugene, Oregon, also paused its use of Flock Safety cameras over privacy concerns.
It also follows residents recently voicing safety concerns over a private real estate company installing the cameras in Brookline.
Cambridge City Councilor Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler agrees, saying the technology can aid federal overreach.
“The data is in the cloud and all these systems are interconnected,” Sobrinho-Wheeler said. “We have to be vigilant.”
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com