Recently, Albany officials reviewed the city’s agreement with Flock Safety, an Atlanta -based company that provides license plate readers to law enforcement across the country, including the Albany Police Department.
Albany officials recently reviewed their agreement with Atlanta -based Flock Safety, as some cities suspend their operations out of data-sharing concerns. According to a company spokesperson, data collected from the cameras belongs 100% to cities, who can choose how to share it.
That review came as some cities have suspended their camera systems following community pushback and concern officials would share data with federal authorities, particularly for immigration enforcement operations.
But according to Albany police Chief Marcia Harnden, the city does not share any data with agencies outside of Oregon or the federal government.
Harnden plans to brief the City Council on the topic this week.
WHY FLOCK?
City leaders paved the way for the cameras last year, when they approved the Albany Police Department’s use of a nearly $55,000 grant from the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission for license plate readers and other software to combat organized retail theft.
Over a year later, Albany currently has one Flock camera operating on a lamp post at First Avenue and Ellsworth Street, but the department is looking to place three more, according to Harnden in a phone call.
As to where they would be located, Harnden said some Albany businesses operate their own Flock cameras, and the department would want to find locations that fill gaps.
The Albany Police Department has one Flock camera on First Ave and Ellsworth Street and is looking to place three more.
The cameras, for context, read license plates, and law enforcement can only search for vehicles related to a specific crime, Harnden said. According to the police chief, it's been a useful system that can help find missing persons or fleeing suspects.
As an example, she cited a Flock camera located outside of Albany that helped authorities find and arrest a domestic violence suspect in Medford last month.
According to Flock’s information page about its agreement with Albany, data is owned by the city, not shared with out-of-state agencies. That data is also prohibited from being used for immigration enforcement.
Oregon, a sanctuary state, bars state and local law enforcement or public agencies from aiding federal authorities with immigration enforcement without a warrant.
Still, officials have had questions about the cameras.
Councilor Steph Newton, the only no-vote on the license plate readers last year, told Harnden at the September 2024 meeting she worried about data-sharing, privacy violations and the cameras making errors.
DATA, DATA, DATA
Recently, cities across the country, from Olympia, Washington to San Marcos, Texas have pushed the brakes on their Flock systems, citing similar data-sharing fears.
Some Oregon cities have done the same. In nearby Eugene, police have paused their cameras and have moved to share data only with other Lane County law enforcement agencies.
Reached by phone, Flock Safety spokesperson Paris Lewbel said the company had partnered with 5,000-plus law enforcement agencies nationwide and more than 25 such agencies in Oregon, though he said he could not share a state-specific number.
He also said cities owned “100%” of their data.
ASSURANCES
City emails late last month show Albany Councilor Chris Van Drimmelen wanted to review the city’s contract with Flock Safety after the council heard from a constituent.
According to City Manager Peter Troedsson in a follow-up email, the city had “taken a closer look at our relationship" with Flock Safety, adding that while it’s not the city’s policy to share data with federal authorities or out-of-state law enforcement, there was a “problematic and seemingly contradictory assertion” in the city’s data agreement with the company.
Troedsson wrote the city had received “verbal assurances” from Flock Safety that data was shared only with other state law enforcement agencies and told the City Council that Harnden would connect with representatives from the company to address concerns.
He also said license plate readers were “valuable law enforcement tools,” but “if we can’t obtain assurances that data are not being shared, we may have to suspend our use.”
Harnden told Mid-Valley Media last week she had received "written assurances" from the company this month.
She also said misinformation had circulated about the license plate readers, pointing to people mistakenly thinking the cameras performed facial recognition.
While people should consider about how their data is managed and shared, she said, Harnden prefers to see local law enforcement continue to use the tool.
“They’re not as spy intensive as people think,” Harnden said. “It’s an investigative lead, and that’s it.”
©2025 Albany Democrat-Herald, Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
