Controversial new police surveillance cameras installed across the Tri-Cities without public input are photographing every vehicle and license plate that drives by.
The cameras, funded through state grants from the Washington Auto Theft Prevention Authority (WATPA), recently helped the Pasco Police Department apprehend an alleged hit-and-run driver, according to Pasco Lieutenant Tom Groom.
Cities approved the grants largely under the radar through their police departments. Only Richland and West Richland city councils publicly approved the grants, and in both jurisdictions the matter was on the consent calendar with other items that received no discussion and one vote.
The cameras, made by Flock Safety, are mounted on a pole and powered by a solar panel. Each camera photographs the rear of every vehicle that passes it, including the license plate.
Flock owns and installs the cameras; the information they collect goes into a Flock-controlled database. Cities lease the cameras.
Law enforcement agencies can search 30 days of saved plate data, which is also available to other Flock law enforcement users. Police also can put a plate number on a “hotlist” and be alerted when a Flock camera spots it. Data collected runs through state criminal watch lists and the FBI’s primary criminal database, the National Crime Information Center (NCIC).
Homeowners associations, businesses and individuals with Flock cameras can create their own hotlists that will generate alarms when listed plates are photographed. Their data also runs through criminal databases, and law enforcement receives immediate notification when their cameras score a hit against one of them.
Law enforcement agencies have access to information about vehicle owners through the state Department of Licensing’s plate database, but non-law enforcement users do not. A private user could theoretically track a car’s movements while still knowing nothing about who owns it and where the owner lives.
Flock’s data is erased after 30 days, although local agencies can download and save information in their own databases.
The Tri-Cities cameras record thousands of license plates and their locations every day. In Richland, the police department’s transparency portal reports that their cameras detected 251,812 vehicles in the last 30 days.
In an email to the Observer in August, Groom described the Flock cameras as another tool for officers investigating crimes. He wrote that it was “much like when they access criminal histories through national databases,” such as Datamaxx Group and its OMNIXX platform, commonly used to access NCIC data .
The technology is controversial because of the huge store of information on people going about their daily lives, with little oversight or regulation.
“Abuse of the Flock system has already happened and is going to happen again,” Richland resident Guy Steen warned the Richland City Council at a June 20 council meeting. Steen did not cite specifics.
Who has the system
Kennewick, Pasco, Richland, and West Richland police departments, and the Benton County Sheriff’s Office, received state grants of about $31,000 each from WATPA last year to lease 10 Flock cameras for each of their jurisdictions.
Franklin County intersections outside of Pasco don’t have the cameras, according to Franklin County Sheriff Jim Raymond in an email to the Observer.
Data collected by the Flock cameras in the Tri-Cities is available to anyone who has a contract with Flock “where there is an investigative or bona fide lawful purpose,” according to Richland’s contract that was obtained under the Washington Public Records Act.
Although, according to the contract with Richland, Flock deletes all footage on a rolling 30-day basis, agencies can extract, download and archive footage from the system on its own storage devices for auditing and prosecutorial / administrative purposes.
Depending on what Flock advertisement that you read, the company serves anywhere from 1,400 to 3,000 communities.
Richland resident notices the cameras
The installation of the cameras didn’t slip by Steen, who noticed one near his home and pointed out to the Richland council that Flock Safety, which controls the database of information from around the county, “has no legal oversight or restrictions.”
He suggested that the City of Richland set up its own restrictions on how the data is used, how long the data is maintained and who it is shared with.
WATPA itself does not regulate the cameras. It was created by the Washington Legislature in 2007, signed into law by Governor Christine Gregoire, and became effective on July 1, 2007. Ten appointees named by the governor represent law enforcement, prosecution, the auto industry, the insurance industry, the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, and one member of the public.
The WATPA account is funded with $2.58 of every $10 surcharge collected on traffic infractions.
American Civil Liberties Union, while not opposing license plate readers for certain purposes, has concerns about Flock.
The ACLU doesn’t find every use of license plate readers objectionable, according to their website on the technology.
It does say, “that “using Flock cameras should be opposed outright. But where that battle can’t be won, then any system should at least be confined to the community itself and not made part of a national and international mass-surveillance system.”
The organization is concerned that Flock is creating comprehensive records of everybody’s comings and goings, including trips to doctor’s offices, religious institutions, and political gatherings.
Information on the ACLU website notes that the Flock’s database has a wide range of users. The information could be used, the organization points out, to enforce anti-immigration or anti-abortion laws from other jurisdictions or even assist foreign, authoritarian regimes hunting political opponents.
If the Flock system is adopted, the ACLU suggests restrictions that include limiting the data collected to local use, keeping data in the system for no longer than three days and restricting how the data is used.
City of Richland responds
In a phone interview with the Observer, Steen said that after he attended the city council meeting, he was invited to meet with the City Manager Jon Amundson, City Attorney Heather Kintzley and Police Chief Brigit Clary to discuss his concerns.
Soon after, according to Steen, the Richland Police Department posted on its transparency portal an overview and description of the camera program.
In an email to the Observer, Clary noted that the cameras could help locate missing children or endangered adults and wrote, ”We have strict policies in compliance with the law that governs how this information is used.”
Clary said Commander Jon Schwarder is responsible for overseeing the program.
More than a photo of a car is needed to charge someone with a crime
Kennewick Police Chief Chris Guerrero said in a Sept. 7 email to the Observer that more than a photo of a car was needed to charge someone with a crime.
“As you are likely very aware, arrests are made under the standard of probable cause,” Guerrero said. “FLOCK cameras provide us investigative information that assists in the development of probable cause for a suspect’s arrest. Given the information that the FLOCK cameras provide, it is unlikely that probable cause is developed by the use of the FLOCK cameras alone.”
Pasco’s Lt. Groom said his department’s officers “are authorized to access the system in an official capacity when investigating a crime. They need to have a lawful purpose to do so, and document this purpose, much like when they access criminal histories through national databases. If it were determined that an officer was accessing the system outside of this scope, the Professional Standards Division would investigate.”
I wish we had red light cameras.
Hi Mary, I appreciate your comment. When I asked people about the Flock cameras, many of them had your response. Pasco has the traffic cameras that I believe are for red lights. I have a friend who received a ticket from one of those. Thank you for reading the Observer. Randy
I wish there were cameras at the intersection of Van Giesen and the Bypass!!
Motorists running red lights is rampant at that intersection. So is middle of the night drag racing. And it is an especially dangerous intersection for pedestrians even in broad daylight.
I can’t tell you how many times drivers only look over their left shoulder when wanting to turn right on red. Therefore, they fail to see pedestrian-me on their right side, legally crossing in the crosswalk with the walk sign illuminated. Slammed brakes and me sprinting to the nearest curb have kept me unharmed, so far.
Take a look at the mangled light poles and broken curbing around the islands and it’ll give you an idea how there are no safe zones for pedestrians. Each time I consider walking to the healthclub on Terminal Drive, I ask myself whether I really want to face that intersection or not.
Hi J Doh,
I appreciate your comment. There is a Flock camera at the intersection of Van Giesen and the bypass. I included a picture of it in my article. It photographs license plates and cars but doesn’t record speed or whether it ran a red light. I agree that we may need the “red light cameras” to enforce our traffic laws and make everyone safer. Thank you for reading the Observer. Randy
Thank you for providing news that i literally cannot get anywhere else.
Hi Eric, Thank you. Kind words like yours keep me going. Randy