Norwood PD talk Flock

Norwood Police Department (NPD) Chief Christopher Padden met with about 50 residents last Wednesday, Sept. 30, to discuss the department’s use of Flock Cameras and answer questions around the camera system.

Padden went through a presentation regarding policies and the user agreement the department has with Flock, which was similar to that he presented to the Norwood Board of Selectmen in September – https://gvimes.link/flkrcrd

He said Norwood has 14 Flock cameras installed around the Town’s major border streets. Each camera is what is called an automatic license plate reader (ALPR) camera, and takes several photos of passing vehicles in order to get the license plate of a vehicle.

Padden said the department will use Flock to track persons of interest if they come in or out of the Town, based on either the department’s own records or that of departments which share information with Norwood.

Padden said the department has decided to share its data, via individual request and not a full dump, with departments in New England and New York.

He said the data can be shared through requests from other departments, which have to cite a specific reason for searching for a particular vehicle or license plate.

“One of the big things people are concerned about is local law enforcement and their integration with ICE and federal law enforcement agencies,” he said. “The local police department, and police departments in Massachusetts, don’t enforce immigration laws. The law in Massachusetts is that it’s a civil matter, and we only deal with criminal activity. So, even if we wanted to participate in those programs, which we don’t we would not have the legal right to do that.”

Padden added that as part of the terms of service agreement the department negotiated with Flock, NPD opted out of sharing data with federal law enforcement agencies. But Flock does have the ability to share any data requested from said agencies when and if there is a major threat to national security, like a bomber or mass casualty event.

“They can only look at our data, they can’t take our data and share it with anybody,” he said. “They can look at it, and if they have a case related to that they could save it for a criminal case, let’s say a specific license plate or something along those lines. But they can’t dump our data and give it to another police department. That’s not allowed within the system.”

Assuming that Flock sticks to its agreement, that doesn’t bar other departments with access to Norwood’s, or any other department for that matter, from requesting data from Norwood to give to ICE or other agencies, so long as they’re specific about it and not looking for a data dump. He said they can search either plates or vehicle description in relation to a specific case.

“They would have to put in a reason for their search, and if their reason was one of those reasons (immigration, abortive care) then it wouldn’t go through,” Padden said.

However, Padden allowed that if a searcher on the shared database put in an allowable reason when they search, it’s a different story.

“I can’t sit here and tell you people are not going to lie, or do those kinds of things,” he said. “What you’re asking is if somebody did something wrong, they could get away with it in the system? Then I would think yes.”

On that topic of bad actors, dozens of police officers have made national headlines in the last few months for using Flock to stalk their exes or for reasons other than police work. Padden said the department’s auditing procedure will catch that if it happens here, and disciplinary action up to and including firing would be available to the department.

Padden also said that the department got the funds for the Flock cameras operation and installation through grants.

“We got grant money specifically for street cameras, and then we got other grant money for this,” he said.

One resident asked where approval for the installation of these cameras came from. Padden said because it was grant money, the NPD was able to install and use Flock without a vote from a Town body like Town Meeting or the Board of Selectmen. However, he did say that once that grant money runs out, then Town Meeting would vote on it.

And if the Town voted against funding the program, that would be the end of it.

“If there wasn’t funds, we wouldn’t continue with the program,” Padden said.

Another resident asked about the auditing process for NPD searches within the system. Padden said currently, that’s up to the Department and there is no other oversight.

“If we had an outside auditor that was certified – like we have other auditors that come in to audit the Town of Norwood – they could come and put out some sort of a letter that would say that we’re in compliance with policy, or something along those lines,” he said.

Also on the docket was the question of privacy and the sale of data. Flock has stated it leaves data sharing off by default and will not share or sell if the customer says so.

However, the City of Boston Police Department (BPD) canceled its contract with Flock because it was found to be sharing data and was unaware of that fact. Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and the BPD ssent out a statement clarifying the city’s position:

“When the Boston Police Department discovered that a Flock data-sharing function had been enabled despite a clear, contractual agreement prohibiting its use, BPD immediately directed the vendor to disable it,” the statement read. “The city has since ended all use of Flock and will not use its services going forward.”

However, there have been news reports stating something different. In Sheboygan, Wisconsin, the city had been using Flock for about five years, and, according to officials, had data storage and sharing off. Much like Norwood, Padden said, which keeps its data – the whole data set, or dump as it was previously referred to as – for 14 days. After that time, the data is supposedly deleted.

But Sheboygan Mayor Ryan Sorenson reportedly said he received an email from a Flock sales representative offering to sell the city five years worth of data on traffic speeds and movements captured by Flock cameras – https://gvimes.link/shbygnflck

Padden said when asked about the selling of data that it’s in the Town’s user agreement that Flock cannot share its data or continue to store it.

“If Flock sells your data, they’d probably kill their own business,” he said. “I think most departments would say that’s in violation of our terms of service with you, and I’d guess they’d lose every customer they have.”

Padden also emphasized that the only data they have is an image of the plate and the motor vehicle.

“They don’t have your name, and they don’t know who you are,” he said. “There is law out there in the state that says you don’t have an expectation of privacy on a public street.”

Padden said they have been using the system to help find suspects and victims throughout the Town, including one incident where a 17-year-old girl was likely being transported without her permission to be trafficked. He said it also helped in a scam case where a couple lost $20,000 in cash to a scammer (he said at the time of the meeting they had not yet arrested the individual or recovered the funds).

He said it also helped with the arrest of a drug dealer, the identification of a suspect who allegedly shot rounds into the air and his several buildings and parked cars, stolen motor vehicles, a potential reckless suicide, the identification of a vehicle involved in a 100 mph chase, and most recently, the disbursement of gasoline on private property in an arson case.

“In terms of the success stories we’ve had here in Town, they’re real,” he said. “I’d hate to have a major incident and not have this tool out there for us. These are not hypothetical, these are real successes we’ve had.”

Several resident spoke in favor of the cameras, including one resident who said she’s been scammed and had her information leak in the past.

“To have my license plate out there on the internet, I personally don’t think it’s a big deal if it helps save someone’s life,” she said.