Kevin Newsom is a Harris County taxpayer, and although he describes himself as a “local ne’er-do-well,” he doesn’t appear to present a threat to public safety. But he and most of his neighbors are frustrated and angry that they’re being watched by Flock Safety cameras.
“We need to cancel the Flock contracts,” Newsom said during a Thursday meeting of commissioners court. “They are unconstitutional. They are illegal. The Fourth Amendment is the ultimate rule we’re supposed to follow when it comes to surveillance. If we’re talking about rules and regulations concerning Flock, if we’re not following the biggest rule, what hope do we have to follow the smaller rules that you’re proposing today?”
Newsom joined dozens of residents who weighed in on the automated license plate readers, sometimes referred to as ALPRs, which have been in place since 2022. Just recently, however, reports surfaced of non-law enforcement employees accessing the system, law enforcement officers abusing the system for personal use, and suspicion that those with access are sharing data with federal immigration authorities.
Commissioners voted 3-2 to direct the Office of County Administration to convene a working group chaired by Sheriff Ed Gonzalez to gather information on automated license plate reader data, access and oversight, and to propose amendments to the county’s contracts with Flock Safety and Vigilant Systems, a subsidiary of Motorola, by February 2027.
Commissioners Adrian Garcia and Tom Ramsey voted against it. Both said they support oversight but noted that Gonzalez already has a working group and is prepared to present a policy regarding the sheriff’s office use of license plate readers within a week or so.
County Judge Lina Hidalgo, who called the public hearing, expressed disappointment that the license plate reader vendors weren’t present to answer questions. She suggested suspending use of all the devices in Harris County while the working group convenes, but there was some confusion over whether contracts would need to be amended to do so.
Also, some of the devices were purchased by neighborhood associations and municipal utility districts, so, although authorized Harris County law enforcement officers can access the data, the devices don’t belong to Harris County.
The cameras use artificial intelligence to capture and analyze information about vehicles, including their make, model, color, and distinguishing features such as bumper stickers or dents.
If they choose to, law enforcement agencies that use them can share access with other agencies, allowing individual camera systems to become part of a broader network spanning jurisdictions across the country.
The Flock technology is used for the purpose of investigations and vehicle identification, which is different from the also-unpopular red-light cameras, posted only at intersections to catch red-light runners. Flock cameras are “everywhere,” according to critics, including in residential neighborhoods, shopping centers and parking garages.
Hidalgo said Thursday she wants to know who’s accessing the cameras, what search terms they are using and where the cameras are located. It can come from the vendors, the working group or the county auditor, Hidalgo said.
“This information is already public in much of the country and things are working just fine, so I don’t buy the argument that there’s a public safety reason why we can’t answer these basic questions,” she said.
Ramsey, the lone Republican on commissioners court, said, “We need to get this under control” and the state Legislature should be engaged in oversight mandates. However, he added, he’s not willing to sacrifice a “legitimate public safety tool” when numerous violent crimes have been solved with the aid of Flock cameras.
“There need to be well-defined controls. I have great confidence in the sheriff’s office and the constable’s office, getting them in a room and defining best practices,” Ramsey said. “I agree there should be a well-defined process in terms of access controls, legitimate law enforcement purposes for searches, audit trails, reasonable retention limits, accountability and misuse. We’ll tighten up the guidelines, but please understand that trust does not eliminate accountability.”
Most of the residents who offered public comments during Thursday’s meeting said the devices have caused more harm than good. “The reporting requirements are nearly nonexistent and the amount of surveillance is ridiculous,” said Aracely Garcia. “Even this morning, just trying to walk in to testify, it was a bit of overkill. Cops were too stupid to identify that my pill case was full of antidepressants and Creatine and made me take it back to my car. None of this makes us more safe.”
However, Andy Kahan, director of victim services for CrimeStoppers, provided evidence that the technology has helped solve crimes in Harris County, including “numerous murders.”
“While privacy concerns are valid and deserve strict regulatory framework, retreating entirely from this critical investigative tool is a step backward for public safety,” he said.
The county renewed the $868,975 contract with Flock Safety in May even though Hidalgo said at the time she didn’t know who has access to the data or even how many license plate readers there are in Harris County and what their locations are.
In response to constituent concerns, Commissioner Lesley Briones ordered last week that all 48 security cameras and 13 license plate readers in her precinct be decommissioned and covered.
“These cameras can be useful tools, but private ownership of the data and the use of AI present serious issues,” Briones said in a statement. “Safety and security include protecting [people’s] privacy.”
During Thursday’s meeting, Hidalgo said that, in May, it was Briones who “used a parliamentary maneuver to force Harris County to sign a contract extension with Flock that did not contain oversight language, and to limit discussion on the matter.” Briones countered that Hidalgo has voted for Flock cameras 15 times.
Several speakers thanked Briones for taking down the cameras in her precinct but Katy Murzda, Texas regional organizer for the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, advocated for the court not spending any more dollars on law enforcement than what is legally required.
“This goes especially for you, Commissioner Briones,” Murzda said. “Taking credit for this decision with one hand while supporting law enforcement budget increases with the other is a contradiction that harms all of our community members. It especially contradicts your stated support for immigrants. In the current political climate, any law enforcement and surveillance inevitably contributes to the federal immigration enforcement machine.”
Commissioner Rodney Ellis said Thursday his office hasn’t paid for any Flock cameras but there are some in his precinct that were ordered by neighborhood associations.
More than 3,500 automated license plate readers are stationed around the county, according to the nonprofit Texas Privacy Coalition. The Harris County Sheriff’s Office operates 480 cameras across 20 networks, primarily municipal utility districts and neighborhood associations that have designated the sheriff’s office as its system administrators.
Texas Comptroller Don Huffines announced Tuesday a ban on the use of state grant money to buy or contract for Flock cameras, automated license plate readers, and other vehicle-identification systems that convert license plate images into computer-readable data.
“The government has no business tracking where law-abiding Texans drive. Doing it without a warrant is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution,” Huffines said in a statement. “Texans should be able to drive to work, to church, or to the grocery store without a government camera logging it in a database.”
The announcement came on the heels of Governor Greg Abbott declaring in late August that he is ordering state agencies to pause funding for Flock cameras. The Texas Tribune reported on September 24 that the funding cuts prompted 14 cities and counties to shut off more than 900 Flock cameras.
The City of Houston, which entered a five-year, $6.4 million contract with Flock Safety in 2022, had to shut down 200 of its 553 Flock cameras because they were funded by state grants.
A recent survey conducted by the University of Houston’s Hobby School of Public Affairs found that while Harris County residents say public safety is their top concern, 58 percent oppose the use of Flock cameras for law enforcement purposes. Forty percent support the technology as a public safety tool.
Hobby School Senior Executive Director Renee Cross, who conducted the survey, said she believes “people want strong law enforcement but not necessarily eyes on them personally.”
“It’s not surprising that a majority oppose Flock cameras, but 59 percent of Republicans support them,” she said. “On one hand, that goes right along with pro-law and order, which has traditionally been the Republicans’ area. But when you hear anecdotal opinions, everyone seems to be against them. It was somewhat surprising to me that they had almost 60 percent [Republican] approval of Flock cameras.”
Much of the criticism has been that the Flock cameras are misused by law enforcement officers who are stalking ex-partners. Cops in Fort Bend County, Pasadena, Baytown and Deer Park have been disciplined for abusing the system for personal use.
Three Harris County Sheriff’s Office deputies have been subject to internal affairs investigations because excessive use of the system was flagged by a USA Today reporter analyzing Flock searches. At least one of the officers was cleared when the investigation showed he was using the data to gather information that led to an arrest.
Sheriff Gonzalez said in a statement last month that license plate readers have “thwarted kidnapping attempts, led to the quick apprehension of armed robbery crews, and helped recover countless stolen vehicles.”
In response to the investigation prompted by the USA Today reporter’s questions, the Harris County Sheriff’s Office implemented an auditing tool that proactively monitors deputies’ use of license plate reader technology, investigates questionable activity and requires officers to provide a descriptive case code for all license plate searches.
