I don’t feel this helps the residents of Portsmouth and that’s whom I was elected to represent.”

Sondra Blank, Portsmouth Town Council

PORTSMOUTH — Widespread privacy worries — from potential data breaches to the expansion of government surveillance — led the town council last week to unanimously delay a request from the Rhode Island State Police to install a Flock Safety license plate reader camera in town.

The council voted 7-0 to table the matter until the State Police return with a completed memorandum of understanding (MOU) that spells out who owns the camera data, how it may be shared and what safeguards would prevent misuse.

The proposed device is part of a statewide rollout of 39 Flock Safety automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras. Capt. Marc A. Alboum of the Rhode Island State Police, who presented the request, said the state wants to install one in Portsmouth and must secure a municipal approval letter for its permit.

At the Nov. 24 meeting, however, several council members and residents questioned whether the growing national network of ALPR systems could erode civil liberties or enable intrusive tracking. The Bristol Town Council heard much of the same concerns on Nov. 12, when it voted to table the matter until Dec. 10.

Former council member and attorney Leonard Katzman warned that “this room was filled with people who were concerned about safety and privacy” the last time the installation of Flock cameras came up locally in 2022, when he was a member of the council. That year, the council approved the installation of ALPR cameras on the Mt. Hope Bridge to assist police in suicide prevention, only to rescind the vote a month later after residents voiced privacy concerns.

Katzman urged council members to search online for reports of security breaches, hacking demonstrations and misuse in other states. He cited a widely reported case in Texas in which police used Flock’s multi-state network to track a resident who left the state for a legal abortion. “Their goal is not safety; their goal is to make money,” he said of the company.

Rep. Michelle McGaw (D-Dist. 71) said she hears recurring concerns from constituents and noted that advancing technologies — including AI and facial recognition — raise questions about how ALPR data could be combined with other systems in the future. She said the ACLU strongly opposes the expansion of such networks. (Note: McGaw is the wife of Portsmouth Times editor Jim McGaw.)

Who owns the images?

Council member Sondra Blank, who works in technology and artificial intelligence, questioned whether a private company should hold any of the collected images. “I don’t feel this helps the residents of Portsmouth and that’s whom I was elected to represent,” she said.

Alboum said agencies with access must sign MOUs prohibiting such use and “you’re going to be held accountable.” When asked who ultimately owns the data, Alboum said he believes it would be the State Police, but negotiations with Flock are ongoing.

Alboum stressed that the system is designed for investigative efficiency, not surveillance, and said the camera would capture only the rear of vehicles and their license plates. Data, he said, is deleted after 30 days. He added that Flock cameras do not record faces, track speed or collect other biometrics, and that the systems are compliant with FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, federal cybersecurity frameworks and the National Defense Authorization Act.

He said at least 14 Rhode Island municipalities, as well as colleges, housing communities and commercial properties, already use Flock technology. He also emphasized that Portsmouth would not be contracting with Flock directly. “The contract will be between the Rhode Island State Police and Flock,” he said.

The proposed camera location is Route 24 northbound near the Gull Cove exit, where it could capture plates leaving Aquidneck Island toward the Sakonnet River Bridge. Alboum said the system would cost Portsmouth nothing and would remain in place for at least three years. He also argued that the technology could speed responses to Amber, Silver and Purple alerts and assist departments facing staffing shortages.

Chief’s on board

Police Chief Brian Peters expressed full support for the Flock program. With only three officers on the road at any given time, he said, ALPR alerts could help locate missing children, seniors and individuals in crisis and assist with fast-moving incidents such as recent high-speed crimes. 

“This is a force multiplier,” he said.

Peters and Alboum both brought up a Portsmouth case from 2013 in which the Flock technology could have helped police make an arrest much sooner. It involved a 13-year-old girl who was taken from her home on Ferry Landing Circle one July morning and was missing all day. Portsmouth Police, along with the FBI and State Police from Rhode Island and New Jersey worked on the case.

The girl was found safe but distraught the next day with a 27-year-old man in New Jersey and was returned to her family, while the man faced charges. “We were very lucky at the time,” Peters said.

However, police learned from the girl that she had gone over the Mt. Hope Bridge, and witnesses said she was in a red Chrysler with unknown New Jersey license plates, noted Alboum.

“If a Flock camera (had been) in place, we would have typed in ‘red Chrysler, unknown New Jersey license plates’” and the car would have been stopped before leaving Rhode Island, Alboum said.

Some council members acknowledged those benefits but said the town needs firmer assurances. Council President Keith Hamilton said he was uncomfortable moving forward before data-sharing policies are finalized. Vice President David Gleason said he preferred to watch how the rollout unfolds in other communities, while council member Mary McDowell said there were still “too many unknowns.”

Alboum noted that the statewide system will proceed regardless of Portsmouth’s participation and said similar cameras are already used in Providence, where “crime’s down.”

After discussion, the council voted unanimously to postpone action until the State Police return with an MOU and clearer details on privacy, data retention and oversight.