In Northern Kentucky, growing disdain over Flock Safety’s automated license plate cameras has recently prompted community discussions, city halls and even direct action from cities and counties.
In Newport, police were considering a two-year contract for six Flock cameras after what they called a successful trial. But after resident opposition and court rulings, police ended up reversing their position and cut ties with Flock Safety.
The Kenton County Police Department has also asked the county to consider a bid for automated license plate readers, but no decision has been made yet.
The latest city to scrutinize its relationship with Flock is Independence. The city first purchased Flock cameras in 2024 — after a free trial in 2023. It now has 15 cameras installed — and purchased five more in July, according to LinkNKY. In a town hall meeting Monday night, elected officials and police department staff spoke in support of surveillance technology.
“We did an initial trial and we had a lot of good results,” said Mayor Chris Reinersman at the beginning of the hearing — later making it clear he is strongly in support of the Flock cameras.
But for the next two hours, citizen after citizen spoke against the cameras. Many were concerned about their private data, and the potential of it being accessed and abused by police officers around the country.
“I’m not claiming every camera is currently being hacked,” resident Andrew Harmon said “The question is, why should we participate in a system capable of these abuses?”
The city did not make any decisions on the future of Flock cameras in Independence at this meeting.
The conversation
Independence Chief of Police Brian Ferayorni touted the results of Flock cameras in the city.
“Successes — we've had a lot,” Ferayorni said. He listed 31 examples of successfully using Flock cameras to solve cases in a packet he handed out to meeting attendees.
Ferayorni signed a renewed agreement to share data with Flock Safety in July. In it, the city is named as the sole owner of data collected by the Flock cameras. He also touted Flock Safety’s automatic audit system.
“It'll send me an alert — basically if there was a tag run multiple times,” Ferayorni said. “Then the officers have to put in you know why they're running it, and I can verify right this is a legitimate case.”
Recently, Flock Safety announced it was shortening its default data retention period from 30 days to seven days. However, existing customers, like Independence, will be grandfathered into the longer 30 day retention period.
“We don’t own it, you own it,” said Flock Safety Public Affairs Manager and retired police chief Phillip Arnold regarding data ownership. “Your department decides who to share the data with.”
But that didn’t address resident Wendy Lane’s concerns. The agreement stipulates that in emergency situations and extreme circumstances, police departments and federal agencies outside of Independence could also access data and the company could extend retention periods.
“My question would be: who gets to decide what these extreme circumstances are?” Lane asked. “Who gets to make that decision when all of a sudden, our rights don’t matter.”
When a resident asked the council where they stand on whether to continue using Flock cameras, only council member Tom Brinker spoke and said he was opposed.
Later, Council Member Carol Franzen said she would support what the citizens wanted — she read four statements sent to her before the meeting. One of the concerns was in support of the Flock cameras. The other members did not take a stance.
“I just want to urge the council — you are elected officials,” resident Zach Ford told them. “You represent the people of Independence. Please represent your citizens.”
Read more
