ReportWire

Tag: License Plate Readers

  • Northern California police chief suspends use of ALPR cameras after outside agencies access data

    [ad_1]

    The police department in the Northern California city of Mountain View is suspending the use of automated license plate reader cameras after the discovery of unauthorized access to data by federal and state agencies, the police chief said on Monday.

    In a letter to the community, Mountain View Police Chief Mike Canfield said he decided to turn off all Flock Safety ALPR cameras in the Silicon Valley hub because he no longer has confidence in the Flock system. Last week, it was disclosed that hundreds of federal and state law enforcement agencies had accessed the city’s ALPR data without the department’s knowledge.

    “Like many of you, I was deeply disappointed to learn that Flock Safety did not meet the City’s requirements regarding our data access control and transparency,” Canfield stated in the letter. “The existence of access by out of state agencies, without the City’s awareness, that circumvented the protections we purposefully built and believed were in place is frankly unacceptable to me and to the dedicated people of the MVPD.”

    On Jan. 30, the City of Mountain View said an audit of its ALPR system showed that the first ALPR camera deployed had been set to a “nationwide” setting by Flock Safety without MVPD’s permission or knowledge. As a result, between August and November 2024, data from the camera was accessed by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives offices in Kentucky and Nashville, TN; Langley Air Force Base in Virginia; the U.S. GSA Office of Inspector General; Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Nevada; and an Ohio Air Force Base, according to the city, adding that it was unclear whether the searches resulted in license plate information being shared.

    The audit also showed that a “statewide” search function was enabled on 29 of 30 cameras that were deployed, which was against protocols established for the pilot program, the city said. This function allowed Flock to enable access to state law enforcement agencies not approved by MVPD. 

    The statewide setting was immediately disabled on January 5 once the MVPD identified the issue, the city said. 

    “This is a system failure on Flock Safety’s part,” the city said in a statement last week. “MVPD has a policy and controls in place for the ALPR pilot. MVPD worked closely with Flock Safety during the outset of the program to design a model that strictly prohibited out-of-state data sharing and ensured that any agency receiving access to Mountain View’s data was approved by the Police Chief or his designee.” 

    Mountain View’s first ALPR camera went online in August 2024, and the final camera was installed last month. 

    “The council voted to put this in unanimously in 2024, and we were given a lot of assurances that we would have control over our data and who gets access to it, and it definitely would not be used by anyone in the federal government, and that clearly wasn’t the case,” said Mayor Emily Ann Ramos.

    Canfield said the suspension of the Flock camera system was effective immediately and would remain inactive until the City Council provides further direction about the future of the pilot program.

    “I share your anger and frustration regarding how Flock Safety’s system enabled out-of-state agencies to search our license plate data, and I am sorry that such searches occurred. I know how essential transparency is for maintaining trust and for community policing. This is why MVPD has been so open about what we learned and why we are pausing this program until our City Council can weigh in.  

    The City Council was anticipated to discuss the ALPR system at its Feb. 24 meeting.

    “We’ll have to make sure that our police department can maintain a high level of service for our residents,” said Ramos. “I’m just not sure we’re willing to make that trade-off with the LPRs again.”   

    Canfield said that despite the unauthorized ALPR access, the cameras enhance community safety and have helped officers investigate burglaries, home break-ins, and a reported kidnapping. He added that his department was looking into alternative vendors with a stronger track record of data protection, oversight, and transparency.   

    In an emailed statement to CBS News Bay Area, Flock Safety spokesperson Holly Beilin said, “We are working through Mountain View’s specific questions and concerns directly with the city, and will continue to engage with our partners in the Police Department and city government to resolve these issues. We look forward to resuming our successful partnership following the upcoming Council meeting.”

    The City of Mountain View said last week that Flock had assured the city that its systems had been improved and were no longer enabling access outside of the State of California.

    California law prohibits any ALPR information from being sold, shared, or transferred to out-of-state or federal agencies without a court order or warrant issued by a California court. The American Civil Liberties Union has warned that ALPR cameras can infringe on civil rights and potentially violate the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment by facilitating unreasonable searches and pervasive surveillance.

    A six-month investigation by CBS News showed more than a dozen cases of ALPR errors leading to incidents of wrongful stops or instances of the technology being abused.

    Amanda Hari

    contributed to this report.

    In:

    [ad_2]

    Carlos E. Castañeda

    Source link

  • Oakland police seeks expansion of automated camera network, incorporation of private cameras

    [ad_1]

    Should the Oakland Police Department invest in more surveillance cameras and expand its video network to include private cameras? That was the question that was supposed to come before the Public Safety Committee at its regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday afternoon, but that meeting was canceled due to the lack of a quorum.

    It’s been a controversial issue ever since the City of Oakland partnered with Flock cameras two years ago. Both those in support and in opposition held rallies outside City Hall Tuesday afternoon, rallies that were planned well ahead of the meeting being canceled.

    Longtime Oakland business owner Richard Santana has run Café Santana on MacArthur Boulevard in the Laurel neighorhood for more than a decade, and says he has had to change the way he does business because of crime.

    “None of the local businesses around here carry cash because we are always worried that someone’s going to come in here and rob us or take from our customers, so customers don’t carry cash,” Santana said.

    He’s concerned because his shop has been broken into four times over the past 12 years – most recently about a year and a half ago – despite a pile of cameras right above the door.

    That’s why he supports the change in policy the city’s Public Safety Committee was supposed to vote on during the meeting on Tuesday – allowing Oakland Police to not only expand the use of Flock cameras, but also monitor them in real time. The cameras scan license plates and alert police to help track down stolen or wanted cars or those suspected of being used in a crime. OPD also wants to integrate privately owned cameras into its system.

    “If used correctly and they can catch criminals in the act, and get them off the street, that benefits the community, it benefits the neighborhood, it benefits the city, it benefits us all as a whole,” Santana said.

    Privacy issues are a main concern brought up every time the council discusses the Flock cameras. Privacy advocates worry about the possibility of sharing data with other agencies – including federal agencies like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    “I think that certain guidelines, restrictions need to be in place to prohibit any of that stuff happening,” Santana said.

    But Cat Brooks with the Anti-Police Terror Project says if the change is made, no amount of guidelines will protect Oakland residents from living in a surveillance state.

    “So my daughter, she leaves the house, she goes to the lake, she goes to the café … all of those movements are being gathered without her consent and stored in a database that they want us to believe is going to be deleted every 30 days. Says who?” Brooks said. 

    Brooks added that the $2.25 million price tag for the cameras is money that should be used for violence prevention measures.

    “You should be angry that you’re being lied to, and you should start demanding resources and services that are actually going to keep your business, your families, and the rest of Oakland safe,” Brooks said.

    The Public Safety Committee is scheduled to take up the issue at its next regularly scheduled meeting on November 18. 

    [ad_2]

    Katie Nielsen

    Source link