Framingham ends – Framingham police will stop using Flock Safety automated license plate reader cameras after the contract expires June 30. City officials say they will shut off access and decommission the cameras, while residents who spent months challenging the technology pre
On the eve of the June 30 deadline, the Framingham Police Department has told the city it will not renew its contract with Flock Safety—the company behind automated license plate reader cameras that residents had spent months fighting.
In a statement, Framingham Police Department Administrative Lt. Rachel Mickens said the city’s access to the Flock system will be shut off June 30. when the current contract expires. and that the cameras will be decommissioned. Mickens wrote. “We will continue to balance technology and public safety needs with transparency. accountability. and the privacy concerns of the community.”.
For residents like Kate Merritt-O’Toole. a member of Framingham Fights Back. the decision landed like a rare. clear win after repeated efforts to push officials to abandon the surveillance technology. The group describes itself as a place for Framingham residents to “organize and mobilize to protect democracy and our neighbors.”.
“We’ll take our wins where we can get them,” Merritt-O’Toole said. “We’re happy that we’re going to have some more time to educate [officials] on how the technology is evolving and what a lot of these vendors are planning to do with this data.”
The campaign gained confirmation Monday evening that the contract would not be renewed, according to Samantha McGarry, another member of the group, who told Boston.com.
Mickens said Flock will coordinate with the city to schedule the removal of the cameras.
The standoff over Flock Safety has hinged on a simple question: what happens to the data once it’s collected. In a Flock Safety “Security Claims & Facts” sheet. the company says the system is “relentlessly focused on data integrity and security. ” uses strict encryption. and prevents access by foreign entities. Critics counter that the technology enables mass surveillance by collecting and storing information about residents’ movements.
Mayor Charlie Sisitsky initially said in an early statement to Boston.com that “There is no evidence of inappropriate access or sharing of data. ” adding that his administration and the police department remain “committed to ensuring any public safety technology is utilized in a manner that is transparent and accountable.”.
Later, a revised statement was sent that read, in full: “Framingham Police Department’s contract with Flock Safety will not be renewed at this time.”
“We are also committed to addressing concerns raised by community members and elected officials,” Sisitsky added. “Any future decision regarding the Flock Safety program will be made following additional discussions with the Police Chief and City Solicitor.”
Flock Safety did not respond to requests for comment.
Framingham is not alone. The decision comes as other Massachusetts communities, including Cambridge, Watertown, and neighboring Natick, have ended contracts with Flock Safety, with concerns centered on data sharing and oversight.
“I personally support the ending of the Flock contract and having them on our streets. ” Framingham City Council Chair George King wrote in a statement to Boston.com. “However, people need to remember they are everywhere. Stores like Home Depot and Lowe’s have them in their parking lots. so they are coming off our streets but not disappearing by any means.”.
The months leading up to Monday’s confirmation were marked by a steady push from residents who said the problem was never only the cameras themselves. Since February. residents urged city officials not to renew the contract. raising concerns through public meetings. letters to city officials. and testimony before the city council. Merritt-O’Toole said.
“At three to four meetings that I’ve attended, there hasn’t been one single Framingham resident that stood up in favor of using automatic license plate readers,” she said.
Advocates began organizing after discussing not only concerns about the cameras, but how the data could be shared and used, Merritt-O’Toole said.
“They’re such an egregious violation of our First and Fourth Amendment rights,” she said. The Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.”
She also pointed to worries about Flock’s participation in data-sharing networks that can be accessed by federal immigration authorities and other agencies. While Flock Safety states on its website that it does not collaborate with ICE. various advocates maintain the system has been used to target individuals.
“There’s so many loopholes around that,” Merritt-O’Toole said. “This data, who knows where it’s going, and more importantly, how is that data being entered into other systems of databases, such as publicly available information.”
After an April 27 public meeting on the surveillance system, residents sent a letter warning that the city was asking the public to accept “sweeping ‘dragnet’ surveillance system based primarily on trust” with insufficient safeguards and oversight.
“This is not simply a question of whether police use Flock or similar ALPR technologies with good intentions. ” the letter stated. referring to automatic license plate readers. “It is a question of whether Framingham should permit the mass collection and storage of residents’ movements — and whether any system with this level of surveillance power can exist without strong. independent oversight.”.
Merritt-O’Toole said advocates initially struggled to obtain updates from city officials and received no response to their first letter.
On June 15. city officials released a “Transparency & Accountability” document outlining steps they said had been taken in response to public concerns. Officials said the city solicitor’s office was reviewing contract language. and that the police department had already limited information sharing through the Flock system to Massachusetts law enforcement agencies only. with out-of-state law enforcement requiring case-by-case approval.
Even as the contract’s end drew closer, residents said the work wasn’t finished.
“This sends a very good message that if you take the time and organize and have multiple people involved … follow the rules of engagement, showing up at city council meetings, writing letters, whatever — if you’re persistent about it, for the most part, they will listen,” Merritt-O’Toole said.
With the contract set to expire June 30, advocates say their campaign is far from over. They want assurances that the cameras will be removed promptly, that data collection will cease, and that the city will not replace Flock with a similar surveillance system, Merritt-O’Toole said.
“There’s little faith that Flock will stop its data capture,” McGarry said in a statement.
In a letter sent Tuesday to city councilors, McGarry thanked city officials for listening to residents’ concerns while reiterating opposition to automated license reader technology.
“We appreciate the dialogue, but we want to be unambiguous about where we stand as this process continues,” she wrote. “We do not want or need AI mass surveillance disguised as public safety, especially when there is no empirical data to prove its impact.”
City officials. meanwhile. are preparing to debate a proposed “Trust in Local Law Enforcement” ordinance that would establish rules governing the use and oversight of automated license plate reader technology in Framingham. according to John Stefanini. chair of the Rules Subcommittee. The ordinance will be discussed at a June 30 meeting.
“We have been cataloging and reviewing community concerns to protect civil rights. while better understanding the important needs for our police department that use this as a local law enforcement tool to protect and serve our local community. It is a tough balancing act,” Stefanini said in a statement to Boston.com.
“Going forward, we will not allow the use of public resources to collect license plate data unless we have complete control and use of the data exclusively for local law enforcement purposes,” Stefanini added.
Merritt-O’Toole said she views the ordinance as a sign city officials have not abandoned the idea of using license plate reader technology altogether.
“What the city’s doing is they’re trying to position themselves to have proper documentation in place so that if they were to enter into another agreement with another automatic license plate reader company, that they have all their i’s dotted,” she said.
Framingham Flock Safety automated license plate readers ALPR privacy surveillance Fourth Amendment First Amendment Charlie Sisitsky George King Trust in Local Law Enforcement ordinance