DeFlockesha: Anti-Surveillance, Pro Freedom

Have you noticed a number of solar-powered cameras appearing in your city, especially over the last few years?

These cameras, known as Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR), take photos of the license plates of passing cars, as well as characteristics of the vehicle, such as roof racks, bumper stickers and dents (although many ALPRs can do much more than that).

These AI-powered ALPR cameras are networked together, forming a system which can be used to track the movements of a particular vehicle through time and geography. While systems like this could be useful tools for law enforcement, we have significant privacy concerns about their existence and use; read on to find out more.

Q: Why are ALPRs a problem, aren’t they just law enforcement tools?

A: According to DeFlock.org, there are approximately 35 Flock cameras operating just in the 53188 zipcode, for example. This system is presented and sold to cities, townships, counties and municipalities as a useful tool for law enforcement to track down stolen vehicles, find missing persons or catch other types of criminals. However, if we zoom out a bit, we can see that there are currently over ONE HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND Flock cameras operating in the contiguous United States (image credit: DeFlock.org):

The problem with Automated License Plate Readers of all types (Please note: Flock is just one brand name, many others exist) is that they record ALL vehicles passing by, not just those suspected of or engaged in a crime. Since these cameras form a comprehensive network and the data collected is stored, it is easy for any party with access to create a “mosaic of daily life”, or pattern of life for any vehicle they should be interested in. In fact, that happens automatically. This data is absolutely, 100% being collected and filed away for every vehicle which passes these ALPR cameras. Looking at the ALPR map above, it would be hard to imagine driving from Waukesha to literally almost any other destination in the contiguous US without being surveilled for the entire journey. This surveillance occurs without your consent, without your knowledge, and without a warrant.

We believe that the police should have all lawful tools to efficiently do their job, and appreciate immensely their efforts in keeping Waukesha safe. However, it is our position that Flock cameras, and other types of ALPRs which operate similarly, are a clear violation of our 4th Amendment rights.

Broad ALPR networks create an unacceptable Panopticon of Surveillance, electronically stalking the innocent under the guise of searching for the guilty. While the cameras themselves are typically owned by the company providing them, the data collected is provided to and used by agencies of various types throughout the US. For example, a police department in Lindale, Texas or Twin Falls, Idaho can search your license plate in Waukesha, simply by querying the Flock system. With a minimal amount of administrative hassle (sometimes as simple as selecting an option from a dropdown menu), all sorts of organizations can search the Flock (or other ALPR) database and instantly view a mosaic of life for any license plate (or even particular vehicle description) they choose.

Q: Don’t you believe that Waukesha law enforcement agencies will use this technology responsibly?

A: We believe that the method of participation in this system by local entities, while carrying some potential for internal misuse, actually has nothing at all to do with the real issue at hand. Waukesha law enforcement agencies have always worked hard to keep the community safe, and we are not accusing anyone of specific misuse or abuse of the Flock (or other ALPR) systems.

To focus on these local administrative issues works on the assumption that systems like Flock are acceptable, but only if the system is used “responsibly”. Our position is that the system itself is unconstitutional, and there is no way to use it in its current form without contributing to this violation of the citizens’ rights. Efforts by organizations (in many areas, not singling out Waukesha) to increase transparency, audit officers’ use of the system, clarify their offices’ policies on data retention periods etc. are likely well-intentioned, but they bury the lead and skip the most important part: we are not seeking to better understand how this system is used nor implement new local policies; we think it is wrong that it exists.

Flock and other similar systems seem to have been sold to cities, townships and counties as tools to increase law enforcement efficiency and effectiveness. Meanwhile, a nationwide dragnet of surveillance has been being assembled, one small piece at a time. Local governments all across the nation have been sold individual trees, while the forest has been quietly built around us.

We seek to eliminate the normalization of mass surveillance systems like Flock and others, not because we don’t believe that local agencies have good intentions, but because the potential implications of this system are very broad and very negative. If we accept being surveiled at all times (as though law-abiding Citizens of the United States of America are some sort of “flock”, if you will, to be observed and monitored by the government in our daily movements) gives way to further and further infringements into the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Let us be clear: Americans are Citizens, we are not Subjects to be ruled over.

Accepting this separation of the “watched” and the “watchers”, whether those watchers are human or electronic, is antithetical to the American way of life, and it is very important that we do something about this, now.

Q: Ok, these ALPR systems seem like something I don’t want in my community. What can we actually do?

There are a few different methods by which we can effect this very necessary change in our community:

1. City Council meetings: At the beginning of each Waukesha Common Council meeting, there is a period of time set aside for public comment. Making your voice heard at these meetings is a necessary step in making sure our city representatives (Aldermen, Committee Members and the Mayor) understand how the citizenry feels about this issue. You can find information about City Council meetings here (please make sure to read and abide by the Rules of The Common Council which are published there): https://www.waukesha-wi.gov/about_the_common_council/index.php. The meeting schedule for Common Council meetings, which occur on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays of each month at 6:00PM, can be found here: https://waukesha.legistar.com/DepartmentDetail.aspx?ID=24417&GUID=E5B59157-FD27-49DF-918A-1ABF2EA763C5&Mode=MainBody Going to the meetings and expressing concern is a good step; however, we have to remember that we are not just expressing concern, we have a specific request we are making of the city: Remove all ALPR camera systems from Waukesha, including but not limited to the Flock system. Prior to the implementation of any similar system with similar capabilities, we must insist on a public comment period and public vote.
2. Write directly to your local Alderman and express your interest in this matter, as well as your specific request that they make your concerns known to the Council. You can find out who your Alderman is, as well as their contact information, here: https://gis.waukesha-wi.gov/Html5Viewer/?viewer=voting
3. Participate in our Petition, below. Make your voice heard! Submissions to the petition will be brought to the Waukesha City Council to demonstrate our opposition. We need to show our representatives that the citizens who have entrusted them with temporary authority do not approve of this action, and we are coming together to let them know that we do not want this system. Note: remember that while Council members are there to represent their constituents, reversing a move like the implementation of these ALPR systems will be difficult and awkward, and will require the overturning of decisions that sitting members may have made in the past. Governmental momentum can be hard to shift, and significant taxpayer dollars have already been “invested” in this technology. These factors mean there could be predictable resistance to the change we are asking for. To overcome this resistance, we need to illustrate to the local officials that removing the system is the easier option when compared to the continual public backlash against Flock/ALPR use in Waukesha. We will do this respectfully, tactfully, and insistently.