Kentucky Lawmakers Grill Flock Safety on ALPR Data Use and Privacy
Kentucky lawmakers questioned Flock Safety representatives about their license plate reader cameras. Concerns included data privacy, police misuse, and potential facial recognition integration.
Drivers in Kentucky should be aware that the use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras continues to be a topic of discussion among state lawmakers. Recently, Kentucky legislators questioned Flock Safety, a major provider of these cameras, regarding their operations in the state. As Spectrum News 1 reported, these discussions focused on police misuse of data, data ownership, and privacy implications.
For drivers, understanding where these cameras are located and how their data is handled is key. FlockDetour helps you find these camera locations on our /map so you can make informed decisions about your routes.
What are the privacy concerns for drivers?
Lawmakers raised significant concerns about the potential for a surveillance state, echoing fears about privacy and data collection. State Rep. Jennifer Decker, R-Waddy, expressed worries about the extent of surveillance.
Kevin Kane, Flock Safety’s director of governmental affairs, stated that customers share data with no one unless law enforcement chooses to do so. He emphasized that Flock Safety itself does not share data. He also highlighted safeguards like audit logs, which he said helped identify alleged improper searches by a Shively Police officer.
Another major point of contention was facial recognition technology. Northern Kentucky Republican TJ Roberts, R-Burlington, pointed to Flock Safety's patents, suggesting they show an intent to integrate facial recognition with their ALPRs. Kane, however, denied that their ALPRs use or like facial recognition technology.
What changes have been made to ALPR policies in Kentucky?
This year, Kentucky lawmakers established new statewide policies for ALPR cameras. These policies directly impact how your vehicle's data is managed.
- Data Retention: A 90-day cap on how long image data can be stored.
- Audits: Requirements for periodic internal audits of camera usage.
House Majority Whip Jason Nemes, R-Louisville, supports requiring warrants for most Flock searches and external reviews of how officers use the system. He acknowledged the community benefit of the cameras but stressed the need to prevent a police state.
Several Kentucky cities have ended their contracts with Flock Safety this summer. The company states its cameras are active in 6,000 communities nationwide. Lawmakers are expected to revisit ALPR camera policies in the upcoming legislative session, meaning further changes could affect how these systems operate and impact drivers in Kentucky.