Whether in the printed press, on the radio, via broadcast TV, streaming services or blogs, it’s been hard to miss the national news coverage of Flock safety cameras within the last few months. The Washington Post, The New York Times, CBS News, and even Fox News have reported cases of both mistaken identity leading to detentions and arrests (resulting in at least one lawsuit against a town government) and stalking (both locally and across the country).

This is not a partisan issue. Conservative lawmakers, including Josh Hawley of Missouri and Greg Abbott of Texas, are speaking up, proposing investigations and funding cuts. Florida governor Ron DeSantis just ordered the removal of Flock cameras from state roads. Municipalities in both blue and red states have initiated moratoriums or cancelled contracts. Our own governor put a 60-day hold on installation and activation of the cameras and ordered a full investigation.

Flock, in what is certainly a PR move, touts their responsiveness to this flurry of news coverage. They point to additional safeguards (such as requiring the input of a case number) and a shorter data retention period (from 30 days to 7 days). Their CEO, Garrett Langley, was also quoted as stating that officer abuse should be illegal. “I hope that state regulators pass bills that make that a criminal offense. It should not just be a termination. It should be a criminal offense if you abuse your power."

How can we trust Flock when the Bellingham, Mass. police department recently issued a press release with a startling revelation. In addressing Flock’s "Free Form" feature, an AI-powered tool that allows users to search video information using plain-language queries, Police Chief Fitzgerald said, "That concerned me because I had previously told the public, based on our understanding of the system, that our Flock technology was a license plate reader only. I was not aware of the broader Free Form features available through the platform, and I do not believe those features were clearly explained or identified to us."

Last winter when the State Police brought a request for installation of one Flock camera to the Bristol Town Council for approval there was significant pushback from the community. Council Member Aaron Ley listened to his constituents and had concerns of his own. Yet, the Council agreed to allow the installation to be governed by a new ordinance providing guardrails. Again, Councilmen Ley argued for a more comprehensive ordinance with shorter data retention periods and greater accountability and auditing. His amendments did not pass.

What are we left with? A surveillance device that no one truly understands, a weak ordinance, no legal state oversight and a shady company that crows transparency yet is anything but. Keep your eyes open, Bristolians.

Nancy Kellner
Bristol