The company at the center of the spread of automated license-plate reader cameras is changing how its technology is monitored, following a period of public concern and local resistance.

Flock, whose cameras photograph passing vehicles and log their plates for police, has rolled out a set of new auditing and accountability features. The controls are designed to give police departments and the public a clearer record of how the system is used, including who runs searches. The company introduced the changes following public concern about how broadly the cameras collect data and how easily officers can access it.

That concern has been especially visible in Minnesota, where more than a dozen communities have wrestled with whether to install or keep the cameras. In some places officials paused or reconsidered contracts as residents raised objections at public meetings.

The consequences of a mistaken identification were illustrated by the case of a woman who spent seven months entangled in the legal system after police used a Flock camera to identify what turned out to be the wrong car. The episode, reported by Reason, became a reference point for critics who argue that automated identifications can carry serious consequences when they are wrong.

Flock has said its new features are meant to build trust by making police use of the tools more transparent and reviewable.

What the changes will mean in practice is not yet clear. The new auditing controls depend on how individual departments choose to use them, and the local fights over installation and renewal remain unresolved in many of the Minnesota communities where the cameras have become a point of contention.

References

1. 1.Reason — the case of a woman entangled in the legal system for seven months after a Flock camera misidentified a car
2. 2.Local reporting — Minnesota communities debating and reconsidering Flock camera contracts
3. 3.Flock — company statement on new auditing and accountability features