Some Dallas residents and city council members have expressed concern over the AI-powered license plate readers known as Flock cameras in recent weeks.
The devices have raised privacy concerns along with allegations of misuse and surveillance, in both Dallas and across the state.
The Dallas Police Department is expected to cease the use of 321 of its 689 Flock cameras on Sept. 15 after receiving notice that state grant funding would no longer be available for the devices. That block in state grant funding came as a directive from Gov. Greg Abbott in late August.
However, DPD plans to keep the remaining cameras in operation and has maintained that the devices are “an important investigative tool." The cameras have been used to assist locate suspects of vehicle theft and assault along with solving homicides.
The majority of the Dallas City Council agreed, rejecting a proposal to include a budget amendment that would have taken all funding away from Flock.
DPD and a representative with Flock met with the Dallas Public Safety Committee this month to answer questions over how the city uses Flock data, what data is captured, and who has access to its information.
Where are Flock cameras?
DPD's Flock cameras are positioned throughout the city with a priority along "high-crime corridors." A high concentration of Flock cameras are in downtown, the Cedars, South Dallas, and Old East Dallas.
What information do Flock cameras collect?
Trevor Chandler, Senior Director of Public Affairs at Flock, said the cameras take point-in-time photos, typically geared to get the best image of the rear of a vehicle.
Chandler said that just because an image is captured, it does not mean that it will be used.
He contrasted it to other surveillance cameras like video doorbells where the public has no control over how the data is used.
"In this case, this is a tool that is used only for investigatory purposes," Chandler said. "So if you are not the purpose of an investigation, it will not be used."
DPD Sgt. Adam Reinhart said they are not constantly recording and only identified and captures license plates on vehicles.
Can Flock cameras identify individuals?
"There can be people that are caught in the camera whenever a vehicle drives by and identifies a vehicle, it can take the picture," Reinhart said. "And if somebody is walking down the road or in the road, it would catch somebody, but that's not meant for people identification."
If a person where to be captured by the camera, Chandler said, in most cases, the picture would not be clear.
"In the event that that was to happen, it's important to note these cameras do not have facial recognition and they cannot be searched for individuals," Chandler said.
He added that the system cannot be searched for human characteristics either.
DPD stores Flock data for 365 days. That's significantly higher than Flock's recommended seven-day retention. Why?
Flock recommends a default seven-day retention period, down from the initial 30-day retention the company started out with. That period can be adjusted by each community based on their needs, Chandler said.
He said there is no legal standard for what works best for all cities.
"We see in major cities, there tends to be a longer data retention," Chandler said. "This varies from city to city."
DPD Deputy Chief William Griffith said the department needs to keep the 365 days for investigative purposes.
"We may develop a crime trend or a crew committing business robberies and individual robberies and we may not find this out until later or sometimes people do not report sexual assaults right away," Griffith said. "And then after we start investigating, we are able to develop a suspect vehicle, but it might be after that 30 days."
Reinhart said the city of Dallas owns the data from the cameras. All data is automatically purged after its 365-day retention period.
Who has access to DPD's Flock data?
There are about 1,900 officers who have access to Flock data. DPD had close to 3,400 sworn officers as of May.
In order to be authorized to access Flock data, officers watch training videos on how to operate the system and take a short test over the training, Reinhart said.
All Flock data searches require:
- an offense type
- a reason
- a case number to be associated back and through for the auditing process.
All users actions are logged for compliance, Reinhart said.
DPD also shares its Flock data with 202 partner agencies. Reinhart said those agencies are within 100 miles of the city of Dallas and other larger entities within the state of Texas. He said there is currently no sharing outside of Texas.
DPD has access to 1,028 agencies' Flock data.
What happens if a DPD officer misuses Flock data?
As of early September, there had been no reports of DPD officers misusing the Flock system.
However, if a report were to be made on an officer, Griffith said there would be an investigation and the chain of command would make a recommendation on the proper discipline.
"I can tell you, based on having discussion with other command staff members, that it would be [a] very harsh punishment because we take that use of technology very seriously and when you violate that, it's a serious thing," Griffith said.
DPD did not make clear what the "harsh punishment" would be.
Dallas Police Chief Daniel Comeaux said DPD officers have been terminated for body camera violations, which are devices that, unlock Flock, have received a majority of public approval.
"If they misuse the Flock system, they're going to have to come see me," Comeaux said. "And then I'm going to look at the past history and see what's going on and give them the proper punishment."
How much does Flock cost?
DPD previously told the Public Safety Committee in a meeting earlier this year that the initial cost to purchase a Flock camera is $3,300. It also costs $3,300 annually to keep that camera in operation.
What have some council members said about Flock?
Council Member Kathy Stewart: "Let me say, first and foremost, I do not believe that any of the potential for misuse of this tool outweighs the value of the tool. And yet, the misuse has got to be our focus right now. We've got to able to assure the public and reinstate trust that this tool can be used."
Council Member Jesse Moreno: "I do believe this is a good tool and we need to have it, we need keep it. But I want to make sure that we are looking at ways to be accountable. Our residents, rightfully so, have a lot of questions, a lot concerns, when it comes to privacy."
Council Member Chad West: "It really concerns me that the vast majority of people being tracked by this technology are simply just driving around the city of Dallas, and that residents are feeling like they're being surveilled and tracked when they're just you know going to church or going to take their kids somewhere."
Council Member Bill Roth: "This isn't just the loudest people screaming out there, a lot of people are really concerned about this thing. And I want to be able to make sure that you all have the tools, but that we're using those tools properly, safely, and with our citizens in mind as the main focus. They're paying for it. They're giving us the authority to make these kind of decisions and we have a tremendous duty to maintain the integrity and to protect their confidence that they're putting into us."
Mayor Pro Tem Jaime Resendez: "I don't want to minimize the public safety value of these cameras or dismiss the experiences of victims who believe in them. Also, I don't think acknowledging that value requires us to ignore legitimate concerns about privacy, civil liberties, data retention, information sharing, or the potential for misuse."
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Maxie Johnson: "If you've never had a son or a loved one get killed and have someone go missing, then you will kind of have a different opinion than if you did when you come to a resource that can help bring those families closure. I don't know if they had this resource when my son was murdered in 2019. But I know some families that will benefit from this. And so I support it. Because I know what closure feels like."
Got a tip? Email Megan Cardona at mcardona@kera.org.
KERA News is made possible through the generosity of our members. If you find this reporting valuable, consider making a tax-deductible gift today. Thank you!
