Left, Right Unite In Giving A Flock About Plate-Reading Cameras

(Source: MIRS.news, Published 08/26/2026) Opposition to automated license plate-reading cameras is swiftly becoming an unusual bipartisan issue, drawing criticism from Republican activists, progressive candidates, civil libertarians and local officials concerned about how much information the systems collect and who can access it.

In recent days, Lansing city council members have moved toward ending the city's Flock Safety contracts, Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed has used the topic to raise money and Republican Party Chair Sen. Jim Runestad (R-White Lake) has introduced legislation restricting government access to license plate-reader databases.

The subject is beginning to resemble the politics surrounding data centers: Technology rolled out rapidly with relatively little public attention is suddenly drawing resistance from both ends of the political spectrum over questions of privacy, transparency and government oversight.

At Saturday's Republican state convention in Mount Pleasant, 30-year-old Port Huron delegate Zachary Smith volunteered Flock cameras when MIRS asked what subjects can truly make a difference in the 2026 election cycle.

“The number one thing for young people is that we're looking at Flock cameras and jobs for the future. We're worried about the loss of privacy,” Smith said to MIRS. "At least among my group, we've been seeing that as a heavy issue, and you're seeing this in Oakland, Macomb, as well as up to St. Clair, where you have citizens pushing back."

Over in Mid-Michigan's competitive 7th U.S. House district, progressive Democratic nominee William Lawrence called the cameras "the most un-American thing" he can imagine, arguing that the public safety advantages of surveillance technology don't outweigh privacy concerns.

During that same day, Lansing residents packed their city council chambers to express their opposition to Flock cameras. The city council adopted a resolution directing Lansing Mayor Andy Schor and the Lansing Police Department to terminate existing contracts with Flock Safety, the company behind the license plate scanners.

Last weekend, Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed used the issue to attract campaign donations.

The campaign circulated a fundraising message, along with a photo of one of the cameras and a display of a coverage map, reading "if you believe, like me, that you shouldn't be surveilled 24/7, then pitch in $10 today to help me fight back against this in the U.S. Senate."

Runestad, also a state senator, introduced SB 1131 last month to restrict governmental use of ALPRs to specified purposes, like identifying stolen vehicles, missing persons, vehicles connected to felony warrants or ongoing criminal investigations, as well as parking enforcement and other limited uses.

Of particular concern to Liz Balck, the West Michigan policy strategist with the ACLU of Michigan, is that Michigan drivers are unknowingly being subjected to video recordings with Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) posted alongside of the road or in a police cruiser.

She said that the ALPRs can record a vehicle's color and model, dents, bumper stickers and "even the content of truck beds." She said people are becoming quite uncomfortable with the idea that the government is collecting information beyond a license plate number, and holding onto that data and potentially sharing it with other agencies without a warrant.

"This is just such an information grab of people just going about their daily lives, going to church, going to mosque, going to school, going to visit certain people," Balck said.

If such information is kept for weeks, months or longer, Balck said those with access to Flock databases can get a good idea of drivers' personal lives, political views and medical visits.

Flock, a well-known business providing ALPRs, started nine years ago with a 30-day default setting for when data would be erased, unless a state or local body wanted a shorter or longer time period.

On Aug. 13, Flock published that its new default will be at seven days, with the company's analysis showing that more than 90% of database searches without a full plate are done within one week.

However, Balck said the retention timeline is merely a contract provision that can be moved up or down.

"We're playing catch up right now with technology and surveillance. It's moving so fast; it's no wonder that we're a bit caught on our heels," Balck said.

According to Balck, an estimated 125 Michigan communities have used ALPRs as of February.

In the Macomb County city of Sterling Heights, for example, there are 24 Flock cameras. About four years ago, Sterling Heights City Councilmember Michael Radtke Jr. was the single no-vote against the community's initial Flock contract.

After recently asking for the last year of Flock records, which came "quite redacted," Radtke found that Sterling Heights was doing more than 1 million monthly license plate reads.

"We're running, on average, maybe 5% of the searches, maybe 20 searches per day using Flock. So all these other thousands and thousands . . . of searches in our system are being done from police departments across the country," Radtke said.

Radtke said all it takes to add another police department to one municipality's Flock system is a yes-or-no toggle switch similar to a friend request on Facebook. He explained that when he asked the police department how they're ensuring other departments have the same ethical and legal standards as they do, "they really couldn't answer on that."

"Everything about Flock is about trust. 'We trust them; they trust us.' Well, I don't trust anyone. I verify, right?" Radtke said.

As for reforms, he'd like to make accessing the city's Flock data with “ill intent” a local misdemeanor. He additionally wants to create a permission slip where outside departments trying to access Sterling Heights' data must agree not to use it for tracking reproductive healthcare visits or immigration enforcement.

Senate Civil Rights, Judiciary and Public Safety Chair Stephanie Chang (D-Detroit) said she's had conversations with the Governor's office, expressing concerns about the ALPR systems partnering with border control.

She said there are a lot of concerns around privacy and data sharing, igniting a lot of local advocacy throughout Michigan.

For example, outside a taco truck in Clio, a Genesee County community, a petition was being circulated asking the local government to remove and ban any form of mass surveillance technology, ranging from Flock cameras to audio listening devices.

As for what she's going to do on the topic, Chang explained she's eagerly watching HB 5492 and HB 5493 by Reps. Douglas Wozniak (R-Shelby Township) and Jimmie Wilson JR. (D-Ypsilanti).

Under the bills, a local government's ALPR system cannot hang onto captured plate data for longer than 14 days, unless a preservation request is submitted. If one is, the data must be destroyed either upon a court denial of 14 days after the request was made.

Registered vehicle owners must consent to having information on their car disclosed in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. ALPR contractors under the bill would be obligated as well to send quarterly reports to the government body they're serving on the system's practices and uses.

The bills share much of the vision in Runestad's legislation.

"I think that they seem to be on the right track, and have already made some progress with a committee hearing," Chang said. "I'm hoping that, especially as residents across the state continue to make their voices heard on this, that (the House) can continue to also build some of the political will and political support."