Flock Safety’s Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras have made many headlines over the past few months.
Privacy advocates hate them, police like them and the Columbus City Council seems split.
Columbus City Council has scheduled a public hearing on the Flock cameras at 4 p.m. Monday at City Hall.
Here’s everything you should know about why the technology is controversial, what has happened in Columbus and what the future may look like.
What are Flock cameras?
Founded in 2017, Flock Safety describes itself on its website as building technology “that helps law enforcement, businesses, schools, and communities find relevant information, respond faster, and make better-informed decisions.”
Flock has several types of surveillance cameras. The Columbus Division of Police (CPD) uses only one type, Flock’s “Falcon” model, which is an automated license plate reader. This is a stationary camera installed on the side of the road to scan vehicles that pass by and log license plates, the vehicle's color and even bumper stickers. The camera then uploads that data into a searchable database for police.
Flock says that its cameras don’t use facial recognition or link its data to motor vehicle bureau data.
The company also says the cameras don’t specifically track vehicles. They just show the vehicle's location and the time it was scanned, which police can then use to track a vehicle.
Columbus began its contract with Flock in 2023, and have steadily added cameras. Columbus police currently have 65 active cameras, with 11 more planned for a total of 76.
Watchdog group DeFlock logs the location of Flock cameras. Its map says Franklin County has 580 cameras. The group’s analysis puts Franklin County in the top 20% of cameras per capita in the U.S.
Flock also offers sharing features, including statewide and nationwide-sharing capability.
Statewide and nationwide sharing are similar, allowing agencies to unilaterally share network data with other police agencies.
Columbus police told WOSU that it was unable to determine which specific agencies it shared access with.
What has happened in Columbus?
Worries about Columbus’ Flock cameras grew louder after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents conducted “Operation Buckeye” at the end of December 2025. Activists who oppose ICE feared federal agents used data from Flock cameras to assist in immigration investigations and detainments.
Flock said it doesn’t have a contract with ICE or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. However, privacy advocates have pointed out that ICE doesn’t need to have a contract with Flock to gain access to the company’s camera network.
In January, WOSU spoke with Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, for WOSU's look into police surveillance technology in central Ohio.
“What has actually happened is then ICE just goes to a friendly local police department whose philosophies are aligned with ICE and says ‘hey can you run a search for us on your Flock system’ and they say ‘sure,’” Marlow said. “It's happened, by the way. It's not hypothetical. That has happened dozens, if not hundreds of times, maybe thousands of times.”
During a Columbus City Council meeting in early June, Councilmember Emmanuel Remy paused to discuss Flock cameras. CPD Deputy Chief Tim Myers told City Council that Columbus police had asked Flock to add a feature to prevent searches from police agencies that have agreements with ICE that basically deputize local police and corrections officers to take on federal immigration enforcement duties. Flock has not added that feature.
Myers defended Flock's use to council members, assuring them the division is working on policy to protect residents.
On June 3, Columbus police disabled the nationwide network feature for its Flock cameras. The division said it would shift to individually vetting out-of-state agencies for agreements with ICE.
In July, Columbus police released an audit of its Flock network, along with all of its search logs. The audit revealed CPD’s Flock network was searched more than 15,000 times for possible immigration-related reasons. Notably, there were no searches directly from ICE.
In response, Columbus Mayor Andrew Ginther ordered Columbus police to disable the statewide sharing feature for the cameras as well. Remy quickly announced City Council would hold a public hearing on the results of the audit as well as the future of Flock technology in the city.
After the audit's release, privacy activists renewed their calls for stronger protections regarding Flock. Paul Shannon, the founder of the Upper Arlington chapter of DeFlock, said the audit is only more proof that stronger policies and laws regarding police surveillance are needed.
“That sort of back door into immigration searches is really concerning,” Shannon said. “It’s just a totally opaque system where we really don't have an idea of what they’re doing.”
Remy also spoke about the audit, but stopped short of saying Columbus would consider canceling its contract with Flock.
“I think this is a valuable tool that has helped solve many crimes, and when you talk to the victims of those crimes, they absolutely want this in place because it's solved murders, it's found kidnapped children. It has been there to help against youth violence,” Remy said.
Columbus police also spoke to media after the audit’s release. Myers again defended Flock, saying the cameras aid crime solving, including about 60% of last year's homicides. He also said the division would stop using the cameras if directed to, but warned against it.
"The community will get exactly what it asks for. Part of my job though is to make it very clear that we will solve fewer crimes. That is demonstrable and beyond dispute," Myers said.
In late July, Columbus police launched a transparency portal, a feature Flock has offered since late 2025. The portal includes which agencies have access to CPD’s Flock cameras, how many license plates have been scanned in the last 30 days and the search limitations Columbus police have put in place.
What now?
The ACLU of Ohio said as more people have become aware of this technology, the more people are concerned about it.
Remy said this is one of the reasons it's important council holds this public hearing.
“This is an opportunity for myself and my colleagues to have a public discussion with the community about Flock, what we found from the audits, what technology is in the world of police investigations, and certainly just understanding better what this means for our law enforcement officers, as well as the implications it has for our residents,” Remy said about the hearing.
When asked about his previous hesitancy to consider canceling the city’s Flock contract, Remy said he’s not ruling anything out.
“Everything's on the table at this point. We are gonna sit there and listen as the division reports out, as Flock reports out, as the community shares their concerns,” Remy said. “Once we have more information, we can make better decisions on what comes next and certainly when their contract is up in December.”
Currently, the city of Columbus does not have any laws regarding automated license plate reader technology. Remy said police are continuing to work on creating policy, but ACLU of Ohio legislative director Gary Daniels said police policy isn’t enough.
“We need statutory laws on the books governing this, because a police policy can be abandoned the next day, and it holds no force of law,” Daniels said. “Police policy is fine, but if you're truly concerned about this, the first step is where's the local law? Where's the local ordinances?”
Daniels and the ACLU of Ohio would like to see the city’s contract with Flock canceled.
“You're not going to get the ACLU of Ohio comfortable with the use of this type of technology, both now and as that slippery slope continues to slide downwards over the days, months and years,” Daniels said. “We're just not going to be able to regulate or restrict this in a way that makes us fully comfortable.”
Daniels is also worried that the public hearing will make ongoing discussions too focused on Flock, allowing other companies that produce similar technology to fly under the radar.
“Flock itself, of course, has become a target and they deserve plenty of criticism. You take Flock out of the equation, you haven't solved the problem,” he said. “You take Flock out, there's going to be another Flock that takes its place, a different company that's essentially doing the same thing.”
Those wishing to provide testimony at Monday's Columbus City Council public hearing on Flock cameras should email pdmejia@columbus.gov by noon.