Privacy concerns defeated it in Portsmouth, but a Rhode Island State Police plan to install a Flock Safety license plate reader/camera on Route 24 is still alive — next stop, the Tiverton Town Council.

State police Capt. Marc A. Alboum, who is leading the state’s efforts to install dozens of the cameras across Rhode Island, said Monday that with the Portsmouth Town Council’s rejection of a camera in that town, he will request consideration from the Tiverton Town Council to install one along the state highway in Tiverton. In December, he had told the Sakonnet Times that if the Portsmouth camera was approved, there would be no need to put one in Tiverton.

There is no scheduled date yet before any hearing in Tiverton.

Portsmouth votes ‘no’

On Tuesday, Jan. 27, the Portsmouth Town Council became the second town in the state to reject the cameras, following Warren as the first in early December. Members of the Bristol Town Council approved a camera on Thursday, Jan. 22.

Flock cameras are automated license plate readers, or ALPRs, that photograph the rear of passing vehicles and log information such as license plate number, time, location, vehicle make, body type and color.

Police agencies can search the data or create “hotlists” that trigger alerts when a vehicle of interest passes a camera.

State police officials and Portsmouth Police Chief Brian Peters pitched the technology as a proven public safety tool, citing its role in solving crimes, locating missing people and responding to emergencies. But Portsmouth councilors said residents’ privacy concerns — particularly about data storage and sharing — ultimately outweighed those benefits.

“I don’t think I’ve received as many e-mails on a subject as I have on this one,” council member Mary McDowell said. “And 99 percent of them have been in opposition.”

“Having a third party having that information scares me a little bit,” Portsmouth Town Council President Keith Hamilton added. “If there were a state law that managed how this data was shared, I’d feel differently. But we’re not there.”

Representatives from Flock Safety attempted to allay those fears in Portsmouth. Kerry McCormack, a public-affairs manager for the Atlanta-based company, said Flock works with roughly 6,000 communities nationwide and partners with more than 1,500 businesses. He said the system helps solve more than 2,800 crimes daily and that 15 percent of reported crimes in the U.S. involve Flock technology.

McCormack stressed that the cameras do not capture images of drivers or passengers, do not use facial recognition and cannot track people’s movements in real time. He said data is owned by the customer, deleted automatically after 30 days by default and never sold.

“We do not support replacing police officers,” McCormack said. “We provide a critical tool to help law enforcement do their job.”

But skepticism lingered.

Council member Juan Carlos Payero pointed out that Flock uses Amazon Web Services for cloud storage and noted that major platforms have been hacked by foreign governments. McCormack said he wasn’t aware of that, but that Flock’s servers have never been breached.

Council member Sondra Blank, who works in technology, asked what kinds of crimes account for the company’s touted success rate. McCormack cited organized crime, retail theft, wanted suspects and missing persons, but said he did not have a detailed breakdown.

— With reports by Jim McGaw