Columbus schedules a public hearing on Flock cameras
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios
Columbus will hold a special public hearing with its Public Safety & Criminal Justice Committee in August to examine police use of Flock Safety license plate readers.
Why it matters: Flock has become a lightning-rod issue nationwide. Its technology is opposed by groups like the ACLU, and a growing number of cities are suspending use over civil rights and privacy concerns.
How it works: Flock cameras, usually mounted on street-side poles, automatically scan and log license plates to create databases used by law enforcement agencies.
- Civil rights groups warn of continually expanded uses and data sharing with outside agencies.
- Columbus inked a two-year, $228,000 contract with Flock in 2024.
The latest: Last week, Mayor Andrew Ginther ordered Columbus police to stop statewide Flock data sharing after an audit found that Columbus' network was searched 15,000 times for immigration-related searches.
- Since 2017, a Ginther executive order has banned the use of city resources to enforce federal immigration policy.
What they're doing: Council Member Emmanuel Remy, who requested the audit, announced the public meeting Aug. 10 to examine findings.
- According to a news release, Flock representatives have been invited to answer public questions.
What they're saying: "This hearing is about transparency and accountability," Remy said in the release.
- "We owe it to Columbus residents to understand exactly what happened, determine whether existing safeguards were sufficient and identify what changes are necessary to ensure these tools are used appropriately moving forward."
Zoom in: Franklin County has nearly 600 cameras, according to DeFlock.org, which maps all Flock and other automated cameras.
- Columbus ranks No. 641 of 3,222 ranked cities in cameras per capita.
Zoom out: Cleveland is having a similar discussion about Flock.
- The company is supported by its mayor but opposed by some council members and local activist groups.