License-plate cameras
Automated license-plate readers are already widely used in Detroit and across Michigan. They help solve cases — and raise questions about data, access, and oversight worth understanding.
What you need to know
license-plate readers operated in Detroit — about 262 of them Flock cameras — on a contract running through June 2029.
Police describe plate readers as a tool to recover stolen vehicles, locate missing persons, and generate leads — and note they are not facial recognition.
Michigan agencies now use Flock — about a third of all agencies statewide. Michigan has no state law setting rules, which is why oversight is part of the conversation.
Questions center on the national search network, data retention, and accuracy. Several communities have added rules or reconsidered contracts, and state bills would require published search logs and deletion timelines.
What the technology is
Automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) are cameras that photograph passing vehicles and record the plate, time, and location. Agencies use them to check plates against lists of stolen cars or vehicles connected to active cases. Detroit and many Michigan communities use them, with Flock Safety as a common vendor.
A note on accuracy: the Grosse Pointes use a different vendor, not Flock, and a widely-shared "Oak Park cancelled Flock" story refers to Oak Park, Illinois, not Michigan. Ferndale, Michigan did end its Flock contract in 2025 after community discussion.
How widely plate readers are used in Michigan
Agencies using Flock grew from about 60 in 2022 to more than 180 by 2026 — roughly a third of agencies statewide. Michigan has no state law setting rules yet, which is why oversight and transparency are being discussed.
Source · GovTech; Michigan Public Radio, April 2026
The case supporters make
Police departments say plate readers help solve real cases — recovering stolen vehicles, finding missing or endangered people, and developing leads quickly. Officials emphasize that the cameras read plates, not faces, and that many agencies set data to delete automatically after a set period.
Some local leaders also argue the tool can help victims by speeding investigations, and that, used within clear limits, it's a practical resource for stretched departments.
Detroit's plate-reader footprint
Detroit operates about 566 license-plate readers — roughly 262 of them Flock cameras — on a contract through June 2029. Knowing the scale helps frame questions about retention, access, and oversight.
Source · Detroit BOPC report, April 2025
The questions people are asking
Because many systems can be searched across a national network, residents and oversight groups ask who can search a community's data and why. Reporting from other states has documented searches that troubled the public, which is part of why transparency — published logs of who searched and for what reason — comes up so often. Detroit's City Council has asked DPD, in writing, to confirm its data isn't shared for immigration enforcement.
People also ask about accuracy. Plate readers occasionally misread characters, and a mistaken "hit" can lead to a tense stop, so error rates and review matter. None of this means the tool has no value — it means clear rules, audits, and retention limits help it stay trusted. Several Michigan communities and state lawmakers are working through exactly those questions now.
A tool can be useful and still deserve clear rules. Understanding both is how a community keeps trust.
The bigger picture
Already here — and connected to a national network
262
Flock cameras in Detroit (of ~566 readers total)
$6.25M
contract running through June 2029
~5,000
agencies that can search each other's data nationwide
The concern isn't one camera — it's the network. A single setting lets thousands of agencies search one another's data, and researchers obtained records of more than 12 million searches by 3,900+ agencies in under a year. Detroit's data sits inside that system, which is why residents and council members keep asking, in writing, who can search it and why.
Searched for immigration
Investigative reporting found thousands of searches of the national plate network logged as “immigration,” “ICE,” or “ICE WARRANT” — run by local police on behalf of federal agents.
404 Media ↗Searched across state lines
A Texas sheriff's office searched 83,345 cameras nationwide for a woman who'd had an abortion — reaching states where it's legal. The reason field read, verbatim, “had an abortion.”
EFF ↗Wrong, at gunpoint
In Aurora, Colorado, police drew guns on a mother and four children after a reader matched her SUV to a stolen motorcycle on out-of-state plates. The city settled for $1.9 million.
EFF; CNN ↗Police also point to real benefits — recovering stolen cars, finding missing people — and note the cameras read plates, not faces. Both the usefulness and these documented cases are real; that's why clear rules, audits, and retention limits matter.
You are not alone in asking
A growing backlash
Detroit isn't having this conversation in isolation. Across the country — and right next door — communities are taking a hard look at plate-reader networks and, in many cases, turning them off.
30+
localities that canceled or deactivated Flock since 2025
NPR
80,000+
cameras in Flock's searchable national network
404 Media
12M
searches by ~3,900 agencies in under a year (audit logs)
EFF
Communities that pulled back
- Ferndale, MINov 2025
Flock's nationwide data-sharing violated the city's no-federal-sharing rule; concern cameras on 8 Mile targeted minorities.
- Evanston, ILSep 2025
A state audit found Flock had given federal CBP access to Illinois data — findings called “deeply troubling.”
- Oak Park, ILAug 2025
Out-of-state agencies using the cameras for abortion- and immigration-related searches.
- Austin, TXJun 2025
Concern data could reach ICE; documented improper officer access. Later passed a local privacy law.
- Sedona, AZSep 2025
No public outreach before installation; privacy and data-sharing concerns. Removed unanimously.
- Flagstaff, AZDec 2025
Mass-surveillance concerns and fears of federal data “weaponization.”
- Santa Cruz, CAJan 2026
Local data shared to the national network without residents' consent.
- Cambridge, MADec 2025
A “breach of trust” over how the data was handled.
- San Marcos, TXDec 2025
Privacy, abuse potential, and legal exposure.
- Stanwood & Sedro-Woolley, WANov 2025
After a court ruled Flock images are public records anyone can request.
- Cleveland, OH2026
Renewal rejected in committee; residents said they were “bombarded with Flock.”
- Eugene, OR2025
Privacy and civil-liberties concerns.
It's not only cities. An Illinois state audit found Flock had let federal agents access protected data. A U.S. House Oversight inquiry (Reps. Krishnamoorthi and Garcia) and a letter to the FTC (Sen. Wyden) followed. Virginia and Washington passed driver-privacy laws, and in Michigan, HB 5492/5493 would require a warrant to search plate data and cap retention at 14 days.
“In the end, it was just clear that this wasn't going to be a technology that was going to be well received, or that we could continue to use.”
Becky Daggett
Mayor of Flagstaff, Arizona
NPR, 2026 ↗“Yes, if it was legal in a state, we would not be in a position to stop them.”
Garrett Langley
Flock Safety CEO, on immigration-enforcement use of the network
ACLU, 2025 ↗“Where was the public outreach regarding the use of these cameras in the community? When did that happen? How did it happen?”
Melissa Dunn
Sedona, Arizona councilwoman
Red Rock News, 2025 ↗The movement & the tools
DeFlock
A crowdsourced open-source map of ~90,000 plate-reader locations. Flock sent a cease-and-desist; EFF defended it.
Visit ↗ACLU — “Get the Flock Out” toolkit
An organizing guide to help residents press their councils to opt out.
Visit ↗EFF — Atlas of Surveillance
Maps surveillance tech across 1,700+ agencies, and ran the 2025 audit-log investigation.
Visit ↗404 Media
The investigative reporting that triggered the congressional inquiry and the Illinois audit.
Visit ↗Go all the way down
The cameras that never blink
The full Flock Safety investigation — the nationwide license-plate dragnet, the abortion search, the ICE side door, the breaches, and the towns tearing it back down.
Read the full investigation →Voices
“I don't want people who are victims of crimes not coming forward to the police because they're afraid.”
Tim Willis
Oakland County Undersheriff
Michigan Public Radio, Apr 2026 ↗“The only thing that LPRs collect is images. They're purged after 30 days.”
Scott Underwood
Waterford Police Chief
GovTech / Michigan Public Radio ↗“That's an extensive amount of travel data that's being held on people just traversing the roadways.”
Gabrielle Dresner
ACLU of Michigan
Bridge Michigan ↗Questions worth asking
Good questions for a good decision
- 01
Who can search Detroit's plate-reader data, and is the search log public?
- 02
How long is the data kept, and when is it deleted?
- 03
What are the rules on sharing with other agencies, including federal ones?
- 04
What is the accuracy rate, and how are mistaken hits reviewed?
- 05
What oversight and auditing are in place, and are the results published?
What a strong, open process looks like
Shared ground most people can agree on
Public, well-documented rules for how plate-reader data is used, kept, and shared — ideally a clear local ordinance.
Published audit logs of searches (reason and agency), which build trust on all sides.
Sensible data-retention limits with automatic deletion.
Open review when contracts come up for renewal, so the community can weigh how it's working.
Dates & decision points to watch
Jun 2029
Detroit's current plate-reader contract is up for renewal — a natural point for public review.
2026
Michigan bills HB 5492 / HB 5493 would require published search logs and deletion timelines.
Ongoing
City Council has asked DPD to confirm in writing how data is and isn't shared.
Statewide
Several Michigan communities are adding rules or reconsidering contracts — examples to learn from.
Primary sources
Every claim on this page links to its source. Some figures come from reporting that should be re-confirmed against primary records before a public hearing — we'd rather you verify than trust us. If you find an error, tell us and we'll fix it.
Show up when it counts
Decisions get made in rooms.
We'll tell you which room, and when.
The most powerful thing a resident can do is be present before the vote. Subscribe and we'll email you ahead of every City Council session, Police Commissioners meeting, and public hearing that shapes our city.