Sterling Heights city officials have asked their law department to look into developing an ordinance that would make it a misdemeanor for police officers or anyone else to misuse license plate reader systems.
The issue arose during a presentation police leaders made to the city council during Wednesday’s meeting about the controversial Flock Safety network.
Unlike the improper use of the state’s Law Enforcement Information Network (LEIN), there currently are no laws forbidding officers from misusing the system, officials said. That prompted Councilman Michael Radtke Jr. to inquire about making it a crime in Sterling Heights.
“The city council has the power to create a local ordinance that would create a 90-day misdemeanor for misusing Flock,” City Attorney Marc Kaszbuski told the council.
License plate reader systems are increasingly becoming part of a growing statewide and national debate, with people expressing privacy and data-sharing concerns.
Although it wasn’t listed as part of the agenda, the item came up during City Manager Mark Vanderpool’s bi-weekly report.
Police Chief Andrew Satterfield and Capt. Jason Bisdorf defended the department’s use of the Flock technology in light of some council members and activists raising data-sharing and privacy concerns.
‘Misconceptions’ over what Flock is
According to the police chief, the department operates 24 Flock cameras throughout Sterling Heights.
He said the camera captures a car’s license plate numbers, a car’s description, and the date, time and location a vehicle passed through, and uploads the data to a searchable database customers can use. The data is deleted after 30 days unless it is flagged for a criminal investigation.
In July, Satterfield revealed the command staff has increased audits of the system from annually to monthly. He said the department uses Flocks an average of 10 to 20 times per day and shares access with other departments, but said searches require a case number or reason for the search.
“There is a lot of misconceptions over what Flock is,” he said.
According to the chief, there have been no incidents of Sterling Heights officers misusing the system. That’s not to say improper use is unheard of as critics point out a recent Washington Post article detailed cases of at least 50 officers using it to conduct surveillance on their past girlfriends.
Radtke, a longtime opponent of the license plate readers, says the system amounts to warrantless searches. He also proposed terminating the city sharing data with another agency that have a partnership with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Radtke also was irritated that the item wasn’t disclosed to the council or the public in advance of Wednesday’s meeting. Had it been an agenda item, he would have “been better prepared” to discuss it.
“This was not on our agenda, so we kind of got sandbagged on this,” said Radtke, who favors cancelling the city’s contract with Flock.
Radtke said Atlanta-based Flock Safety, which manufactures safety technology for law enforcement and other customers, has a 14-page presentation on how to “sell” the system to elected officials.
“At the end of the day, Flock is a company looking to make money,” he said.
Councilman: ‘no reason’ to get rid of system
Other council members argued the technology is one of the dozens of tools available to law enforcement to solve crimes.
Councilman Henry Yanez, a former state legislator and firefighter, said those tools have helped Sterling Heights being consistently named as the safest big city in Michigan.
“At this point, I don’t see a reason to get rid of flock,” he said.
Councilwoman Maria Schmidt said as a mother, she would want police to use any tool at their disposal to find a child that had been kidnapped. “I’m keeping an open mind,” she said.
Eight activists or residents spoke on the license plate readers at Wednesday’s meeting, with all but one calling on city officials to cancel their contract with Flock Safety. They argue there is no evidence to show the system makes the city any safer.
One man said the city has been able to build relationships with people of vulnerable populations that the controversy now jeopardizes.
“I am terrified that we’re going to poison that,” the speaker who did not identify himself said. “We’re going to lose that trust in a way we can’t get back.”