{shortcode-db76040d9d90a5ac5d4d1616605fd60ce85efad6}
The Cambridge City Council voted Monday night to halt the city police department’s use of automated license plate readers because of concerns that the company hired to install the cameras shared data with federal law enforcement.
Councilors voted unanimously to suspend the police department’s use of the cameras until a meeting is held by the Council’s Public Safety Committee. Jeremy H. Warnick, a city spokesperson, confirmed on Tuesday that the readers “are currently not operational.”
Councilors first approved a purchase of automated license plate readers in February, and Cambridge later contracted with Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based security technology company, to supply the cameras.
Flock installed 16 cameras in Cambridge in September, which the department began using shortly after. Police Commissioner Christine A. Elow said that the department had already contacted Flock to deactivate the cameras ahead of the Council’s regular meeting on Monday.
“I think there have been enough questions brought up over this last year that we need to examine the relationship with Flock and if they are trustworthy,” Elow said.
“I do trust when we tell them to shut the cameras off, that that will happen, and we will be able to verify that,” she added.
But Councilors remained concerned over reports that data collected by Flock cameras could be shared with federal agencies — including Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In an email, a Flock spokesperson referred to an August statement by the company’s chief executive Garrett Langley acknowledging that Flock has operated “limited pilots” with CBP but that all were paused that month. Flock has also imposed “strict limitations on federal access,” the company announced in October.
“We respect the Cambridge City Council’s decision and will work closely with the City to provide any information or support needed during its review process,” a company spokesperson wrote.
Councilors also worried that potential data-sharing between the city’s Flock cameras and federal agencies would violate Cambridge’s sanctuary city ordinance, which prevents local police from collaborating with federal immigration enforcement and restricts what information can be voluntarily shared with them.
ICE has contacted Cambridge police six times this year, Elow told the Council in September — though the department consistently refused to cooperate. In May, ICE agents became aware that a woman had been detained by Cambridge police through a national fingerprint database. Agents later arrested her after she was released by the Cambridge Police Department.
ICE activity also surged in September when the agency rolled out “Operation Patriot 2.0,” a surge in immigration enforcement across Massachusetts. Though ICE agents were seen in Cambridge in September, the agency has not made any arrests in the city since May.
“If we as Cambridge don’t support the militarized actions of the Trump administration and the federal outreach we’re seeing in cities across the country, we have to be sure that we aren't using technologies that are facilitating those kinds of actions,” Councilor Jivan G. Sobrinho-Wheeler said.
CBP’s access to Flock’s thousands of cameras nationwide was first reported in August by online news website 404 Media.
Langley wrote that month that CBP was allowed to access data from Flock cameras through a pilot program intended to target “human trafficking and fentanyl distribution.”
The company’s pilots with the federal government “remain on hold,” a spokesperson confirmed.
Spokespeople for the Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Patrol did not respond to requests for comment.
—Staff writer Matan H. Josephy can be reached matan.josephy@thecrimson.com. Follow him on X @matanjosephy.
—Staff writer Laurel M. Shugart can be reached at laurel.shugart@thecrimson.com. Follow them on X @laurelmshugart or on Threads @laurel.shugart.
