Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance And Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise privacy concerns about Flock ALPR cameras; police describe investigative use and public-records access
Summary
A resident told council Flock license-plate cameras share data broadly and have been hacked; Zephyrhills police said Flock is an investigative ALPR system with private and public participants, that data can be obtained via public-records requests, and that they cannot confirm third-party hacking claims at the meeting.
David G., a resident, told the Jan. 12 Zephyrhills City Council he is worried Flock automated license-plate reader (ALPR) cameras are not operated solely by law enforcement and that images and data are shared with private parties and accessible via public-records requests. He said he believes some camera images of vehicle occupants are available online and alleged past hacks and resale of camera data.
"The issue, again, is with Flock, not law enforcement," David G. said, acknowledging local police and county agencies "have been doing a great job." He urged the city to consider alternatives to Flock and expressed distrust of the company's public statements about data collection accuracy.
Lieutenant Hill of the Zephyrhills Police Department responded that the system is an investigative tool used by law enforcement and private partners: businesses and private entities may grant access to their cameras so law enforcement can query license-plate matches. Hill said data captured by such camera systems are subject to public-records requests and that he could not enumerate every data field captured.
City staff said Zephyrhills participates in a public–private network of cameras and that when the city uploads information it becomes available to authorized partner agencies. Staff declined to confirm or deny specific third-party hacking claims raised by the speaker and said they could not speak to private vendors’ security practices at length in the meeting.
Next steps: Council did not take formal action at the meeting. Councilmembers and staff discussed the topic in Q&A and asked staff to remain available for follow-up; no formal policy vote or change was proposed at this session.
