Some Arizonans are raising privacy concerns about hundreds of high-tech cameras along major roadways, which use artificial intelligence to identify cars passing by and assist police in solving crimes and catching suspects.
Facing community pushback, three Arizona cities have now canceled their contracts with Flock Safety, which is one of several companies that make automated license plate recognition systems [ALPR].
Valley law enforcement agencies have used the cameras to locate and arrest criminals, find missing people, and solve crimes that had no witnesses.
In 2024, Scottsdale police arrested Raad Almansoori in a parking garage at Scottsdale Fashion Square. Police said he was wanted in connection with two stabbings in Arizona and a murder in New York City. Authorities said they zeroed in on him when ALPRs picked up the license plate of the stolen car he was driving.
Apache Junction Police Chief Mike Pooley said his city installed 38 Flock cameras three years ago.
“It's a proven piece of equipment and technology that has helped us identify criminals and people who are out terrorizing our communities,” Chief Pooley said.
Pooley said the cameras were useful in solving a deadly hit-and-run crash in Apache Junction.
“We found the body of the victim in the road,” Pooley said. “With the use of these license plate reading cameras, we were able to identify the vehicle, and we were able to locate the suspect up in northern Arizona.”
ALPR systems use cameras mounted along major roadways to capture images of every passing car. Artificial intelligence then analyzes those images, extracting data like license plate numbers, vehicle color, make, model, bumper stickers, and dents.
Police users receive real-time alerts on stolen or wanted vehicles. Officers can search archives, typically up to 30 days. They can also automatically share data with some agencies or the whole network.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other critics argue that ALPRs amount to mass surveillance, and they say the proliferation of the cameras raises Fourth Amendment questions about unreasonable searches.
“It is treating our neighbors and our communities as criminals from the get-go rather than going through the due process,” said Arian Chavez, a member of Deflock Tucson, a grassroots organization opposed to ALPRs.
Deflock Tucson organized against the cameras, and members voiced their concerns at a South Tucson City Council meeting last month.
“These are not only tracking our cars, but these are also tracking our way of life, whether or not we're going to school, to the grocery store, or to work. They're tracking all these movements,” Chavez said.
The South Tucson City Council voted to cancel its Flock Safety contract on February 17.
Flagstaff and Sedona also canceled their contracts and removed their Flock cameras after facing public pushback at their city council meetings last year.
Flock Safety told ABC15 the city cancellations were “unfortunate,” and the company gave local examples of what it described as a “powerful crime-solving impact.”
Flock, which says it contracts with 5,000 law enforcement agencies, emphasized its cameras “do not track people.” A company spokesperson also pointed out system safeguards like data retention limits and permanent audit records.
Even so, there are alleged abuses, including a Milwaukee police officer who currently faces a criminal charge for making 179 Flock license plate searches for personal reasons. He pleaded not guilty in court on March 4.
In Arizona, state Senator Kevin Payne, R-District 27, introduced a bill this year to regulate the use of ALPRs.
“We have nothing protecting anyone, so we're trying to put up some guardrails,” Payne said.
Senate Bill 1111 would require law enforcement users to provide a case number for every ALPR search. It would also exempt camera images and data from public records requests. And it would make it a felony to access, share, or sell that data without authorization.
“I just wanted to have some protection for the people and at the same time keep a tool for law enforcement,” Payne said.
Chief Pooley, who is also the head of the Arizona Association of Police Chiefs, helped shape the legislation. He wants to build trust in the community that ALPRs will be used responsibly.
“This information is protected. We don't use it nefariously,” Pooley said. “We use this information to keep this community safe.”
SB1111 is expected to have a final vote in the Senate in the coming days. It would then move to the Arizona House of Representatives for consideration.
Read the full Flock statement:
It is unfortunate that these cities have chosen to cancel their contracts, given the powerful crime-solving impact Flock technology has had in Arizona. In Flagstaff, alone, Flock cameras helped locate a suspect wanted for kidnapping a toddler at knifepoint, and another who was actively threatening staff at Flagstaff Medical Center. Had the Flock technology not been in Flagstaff at the time, that toddler may never have been returned safely; and that threat might have turned into a violent incident. We regret that the removal of Flock technology in these cities will likely mean that local improvements in public safety will move backward.
It is also unfortunate that these discussions have been rife with misinformation, which undermines constructive dialogue. We welcome the chance to answer good faith questions and provide information about our technology, but making public safety decisions based on misinformation propogated on social media is irresponsible and hurts communities.
Flock LPR cameras capture still images focused on license plates and vehicle characteristics. They do not track people, as confirmed by over 30 courts across the country. The system has built-in guardrails, including limited data retention and permanent audit records, that ensure the technology is aligned within state laws, local policy, and the community’s values. They do not use facial recognition.
All data collected via Flock is owned by the customer, per our Terms & Conditions: “Customer Data. As between Flock and Customer, all right, title, and interest in and to Customer Data belong to and are retained by Customer.” Flock cannot sell customer data, nor share it without customer permission.
There is misinformation on social media about Flock’s security standards – the fact is that Flock has not been hacked, and adheres to the most rigorous security standards. Flock is SOC II Type 2, CJIS, FedRAMP 20X, and ISO/IEC 2701 certified, and NDAA-compliant. See our Trust Center."
