The Bristol Town Council voted Jan. 28 to approve installation of a Flock Safety license plate reader camera at a town entry or exit point, with restrictions and oversight requirements.
Flock cameras use artificial intelligence to photograph and read license plates, storing the data in a searchable cloud for law enforcement investigations. Required safeguards include quarterly audit reports to the Town Council, review of any technology or policy changes, and a mandatory 12-month review.
Opposition at the meeting came from those concerned about the regulatory framework of the cameras because there is no nationwide, statewide, or townwide ordinance governing use of license plate reading cameras like these. Speakers, including Providence Police Lieutenant Michael McGarry, Colonel James Manni, and resident Meline McGunning, said the lack of guardrails creates significant risk.
Opponents, including Sharon and Warren Wollschlanger, Robert Crook, David Perry, Nancy Hood, and Samantha Faria, referenced ongoing federal lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of these cameras. Court rulings in other states treating the images gathered as public records, the potential of wrongful stops and arrests, documented settlements ranging from $50,000 to more than $1 million, and the concern that Bristol could be named in civil suits if there is misuse.
“It’s just a photo as the car drives by. It’s not any different than if anyone here tonight walked onto Court Street and took a picture of a license plate affixed to a car on their cell phone. That’s it. They really are not as intrusive as people have made them out to be.” Bristol Police Chief Kevin Lynch said.
Some residents said their concerns focused more on the company itself than on the nature of the cameras themselves. Flock is a private for-profit company that has faced criticism from some privacy advocates over its data access practices. Another concern raised by speakers was that federal immigration agencies like ICE could access Flock data through local law enforcement, and that the cameras could be used to track immigrants and protesters if access controls fail.
Supporters for Flock cameras argue the cameras: they are investigative tools and not live tracking cameras, they capture rear plate and vehicle images only, they do not identify the driver or owner, and have been used for missing children, dementia wanderers, Amber alerts, and violent crime suspect vehicles. There are also policies in place that include access limits, logging, audit trails, and supervisor authorization.
Colonel Michael Winquist of the Cranston/RI Police Chiefs Association said Cranston has used 29 different stationed cameras since 2020, that there is encryption comparable to banking systems, and that the officers overseeing the cameras are trained and audited.
Lieutenant Jonathan Premiano at the Providence Police Real Time Crime Center said that the system is not used for “random” monitoring but was used in the Brown shooting investigation and it helped the police narrow the suspect vehicle pool quickly.
