Senators Duff, Maroney asking towns and cities to put a pause on FLOCK cameras

HARTFORD, Conn. (WFSB) - Your license plate, and a lot more about your car, may be in a private company’s database right now.

Two state senators are asking Connecticut towns to hit pause on the FLOCK cameras making that possible.

There are currently 50 cities and towns across Connecticut that are using some form of FLOCK technology, whether its license plate readers or cameras attached to police cars. That’s according to the School of Public Policy at UConn.

The new request from lawmakers won’t affect them, but now Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff and Senator James Maroney are asking anyone who doesn’t have them already, to put a pause on any of plans to install them until lawmakers can take a closer look.

FLOCK cameras scan your license plate as you drive by - putting that information into a database. They also log identifying vehicle information, like color, make, and bumper stickers.

Police in Connecticut say they’re necessary. They’ve credited the tech with tracking down stolen cars, missing people, or vehicles involved in crimes.

Recently, the towns of Killingworth and Windsor got rid of their FLOCK cameras, concerned about privacy issues.

Senators Bob Duff and James Maroney says they have the same concern, asking any towns and cities looking at adopting new FLOCK tech, to wait at least until the 2027 legislative session.

Ken Barone is the Associate Director at UConn’s Institute for Municipal and Regional Policy.

He found concerning language in FLOCK’s user agreement that police departments accept, a user agreement that says FLOCK can update it at any time.

“You know, the terms, which are, again, they’re publicly available right on FLOCK’s website, say, first, the data belongs to the customer. You read that and you go, okay, I feel good, right?,” says Barone. “Then you read the second sentence and it becomes far more concerning, which is that the customer, the community, the police agency, grants FLOCK a limited, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide license to use and disclose the customer’s data. That’s the department’s data, the community’s data, to provide the FLOCK services and to use the data to support and improve FLOCK’s products and services.”

Earlier this year, state lawmakers passed a law that says out of state agencies, besides Rhode Island, New York and Massachusetts, cannot have access to license plate camera data used by CT police departments unless they have a warrant, after concerns about national agencies searching databases for immigration purposes. Those states mentioned above and other CT agencies must still sign an agreement form before accessing a department’s camera, saying they will not use them for immigration, reproductive rights or gender-affirming care investigations.

Lawmakers also said data can only be stored within police department for 21 days, but that user agreement means FLOCK has it for as long as they want.

“You have given this company flock a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide license to use your data for these very vague, like the language, services,” says Barone.

And in this case, the drivers aren’t the ones saying yes to sharing.

There are other towns and cities that have automated license plate readers not controlled by FLOCK. The press release from Senators Duff and Maroney does not mention them.

The senators pledged to introduce legislation in 2027 to further strengthen privacy protections for residents and tighten how Connecticut regulates the technology.

Additionally, Senators Duff and Maroney will ask the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) to survey every city and town in Connecticut for the number and location of Flock cameras within its borders, giving the state and the public a clear picture of how far the technology has spread.

Flock responded to our questions, several minutes after the story above aired.

A spokesperson said, “Flock does not sell data. Agencies own and control their data; access is limited to authorized users, every search requires a documented reason, and each search creates a permanent audit trail.”

They went on to say, “Connecticut recently enacted one of the strongest laws related to License Plate Readers in the country, including, amongst other stipulations, a 21-day retention period, a documented case code for every search, and protections against using the tool for immigration enforcement. Flock is supportive of ALPR regulation and has already made product changes in Connecticut to comply with this legislation.”

The spokesperson continued, “We know that LPR has made a real impact on Connecticut agencies’ ability to solve crimes, especially involving violent crime, missing people or fleeing suspects when every minute matters. In Connecticut, agencies have used Flock technology to help lead to an arrest in a deadly home invasion in Milford, locate a Bristol man accused of attempting to kidnap children, support an arrest in a Middletown hit-and-run investigation, and contribute to a reported 45% decline in motor-vehicle theft in Norwalk since installation. These are investigative leads that can help officers recover stolen vehicles, identify suspects and protect victims.”

They went on to say, “In July alone, license plate readers in Connecticut alerted to 45 sex offenders, 9 missing people and over 1200 missing cars or plates. We understand there are concerns over privacy and data, however just yesterday, the recent San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury released an independent review of Flock LPR, citing meaningful improvements Flock has made to strengthen privacy, transparency and accountability, including stronger default compliance, enhanced audit capabilities and additional oversight tools. Public safety and privacy are not competing goals. We respect Connecticut communities’ authority to make decisions about public-safety technology, and we will continue listening to the community, answering questions and working with lawmakers.”