Police agencies refuse to share how their Flock cam networks are used by others

Several local police departments changed their automated license plate reader policies after learning — in some cases from Dayton Daily News reporting — that Flock camera databases were used for immigration reasons.

But more than two dozen local police agencies refuse to provide records showing how their ALPR networks are used by outside agencies.

In the last four months, the Dayton Daily News has requested Flock ALPR data from more than 40 local public organizations using Ohio public records law.

Several agencies provided the data, which in some cases led to revelations about how outside agencies used the data for controversial reasons, such as immigration enforcement or unstated reasons.

But many agencies denied the request citing a provision in Ohio law saying images and data captured by ALPR systems are not public record or saying the information is confidential law enforcement records.

“The disclosure of such information could compromise active investigations, law enforcement operations and public safety,” wrote Brookville police Major Tom Simon in an email.

An attorney representing the Dayton Daily News sent letters to the city of Dayton and Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office disputing these denials.

“The request does not seek any images or data captured by the recognition software or any license plate data. And if any such data is maintained with the requested data, it can be redacted. (The exemption) does not shield production of the audit data,” the letters say.

Further, the letters argue that “There is no risk of disclosure of the identification of suspect, confidential informant, protected investigatory technique, or safety information.”

The city of Dayton ultimately releasing some of the data, revealing how the city was used for immigration enforcement. Montgomery County and other agencies still won’t release the data.

Privacy concerns

Privacy advocacy groups say many Ohioans are already very concerned about these powerful surveillance tools, and they say police agencies are refusing to release audit information that should be public records.

“One of the underlying problems with surveillance technology and law enforcement is that so many people are skeptical — at a minimum — of law enforcement and what they are up to and what they are using this technology for,” said Gary Daniels, legislative director of the ACLU of Ohio.

“So then when people try to find out more about it and try to get government records and data they are entitled to and they have a bunch of roadblocks thrown in their way, it certainly does not help the case on the government’s side that ‘we have nothing to hide here’ and ‘we’re only using these things for good purposes.’ ”

The city of Dayton had a policy that prohibited immigration-related searches, and yet external organizations were still able to perform thousands of immigration searches before anyone in leadership intervened.

Two police officers in Reynoldsburg — located east of Columbus — recently resigned after being accused of inappropriate use of the city’s Flock camera system. This was the latest example of a growing number of incidents around the country in which police have been caught using ALPRs to stalk or track community members, including their spouses, ex-lovers and family members.

Local law enforcement and government officials say ALPRs are an invaluable tool that can help identify and apprehend people suspected of very serious crimes, often in cases where other evidence is scarce. Many local jurisdictions say they have internal safeguards in place to ensure their ALPR data is not misused or accessed for inappropriate purposes.

Denied records

The information requested by this news organization includes organizational audit logs that show the searches conducted by internal employees and network audits that document which outside agencies searched their ALPR databases and the stated reasons for the queries.

Governmental entities that provided the requested records included Dayton, Beavercreek, Five Rivers MetroParks, Lebanon, Kettering, Miami Twp., Oxford, Tipp City and Xenia.

Other jurisdictions — including Miamisburg, Oakwood, Springboro and Springfield — did not provide the requested audit logs, but did produce records showing what outside organizations can access their ALPR networks.Hamilton handed over organizational audit data but not the external audits. Fairfield Twp. police provided most of the requested records, except for the stated reasons for the external searches of the department’s network.

But many police agencies, cities and townships that the Dayton Daily News asked for records sent denial letters or emails or did not respond with the requested documents. Many said ALPR data and information are “confidential law enforcement investigatory records” that are prohibited from release under Ohio law.

Letters from the law directors of Bellbrook and Huber Heights claim the images and data captured by ALPR systems that are maintained in a database are prohibited from release under Ohio Revised Code. Ohio House Bill 96, which went into effect last year, changed the state’s public record law to exempt ALPR images and data from public release.

Agencies that denied this news outlet’s requests for these or similar reasons include the Brookville Police Department, the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, the Clayton Police Department, the Eaton Police Department, the Englewood Police Department, the Greene County Sheriff’s Office, the Miami County Park District, the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, the Riverside Police Department and the Warren County Sheriff’s Office.

Centerville, West Carrollton and West Chester Twp. said they have no documents that are responsive to this news outlet’s requests for Flock network audits and search logs. The Butler County Sheriff’s Office, Dayton Public Schools, Liberty Twp., Middletown, Sidney, Trotwood and Union have not provided the requested records.

Fairborn police and the Miami County Sheriff’s Office said this news outlet’s public records requests were overly broad and they asked for more specific requests.

Policy changes

The Dayton and Beavercreek police departments told the Dayton Daily News that they believe ALPR data and information are not public record, but they decided to release the information anyway for the purposes of community transparency and accountability.

“Per (Ohio law), we are not required to release any ALPR data, (but) we chose to in the interest of maintaining a transparent, trustful and open relationship with our community,” said Beavercreek police Capt. Scott Molnar.

But Daniels, with the ACLU of Ohio, disagrees. He said Ohio law prevents the release of images and data from Flock cameras to ensure that people cannot obtain license plate records that document people’s movements and show where they have been. If this were allowed, it would be easy to stalk people.

Daniels said state law should not shield audit logs from public access and inspection.

Many Ohioans have very significant concerns about ALPRs, and the fact that police agencies aren’t sharing their data is not going to inspire confidence that the technology is being used appropriately, Daniels said.

“I feel that for some of (the agencies) it goes back to, ‘Boy, if people are upset now, wait until they see these audit logs,’ ” he said.

And Daniels said the audit logs only have limited value, because the information they contain is not always very telling. The Dayton Daily News found that countless entries listed vague reasons for the network searches. Users can enter in search reasons that just say “information,” “investigation” and “other.” There’s also no easy way to verify the listed search reasons are the actual motivations for the queries.

The Kettering Police Department said the department changed its practices earlier this year to no longer allow immigration-related searches after providing audit logs to the Dayton Daily News. The logs revealed that outside agencies were conducting immigration-related searches.

Five Rivers MetroParks said it blocked immigration-related searches earlier this year following this news outlet’s reporting on immigration searches of local ALPR networks. Springfield police said the agency earlier this year changed its practices to filter out any immigration-related searches.

Dayton turned off its ALPR cameras after revealing that outside agencies searched its database thousands of times explicitly for immigration-related objectives.