Watertown’s contract with the Flock Safety company for eight license plate reading cameras was signed in September, but City officials are working on changing the section covering when data will be shared with other law enforcement. Meanwhile, a neighboring community terminated its contract with Flock, and another is determining its own policy for using the cameras.
At Tuesday’s City Council meeting City Manager George Proakis provided a further update about the Flock cameras. During the previous Council meeting, on Nov. 25, he said that the data from the cameras, which take photos of plates but do not have a live feed, will be used only as part of an ongoing investigation. Watertown Police will have to link the request to a documented case, and the use will be audited monthly.
He added that “The Watertown Police Department will not share any images or access with any federal agencies or any departments outside of Massachusetts.” It will share information with other municipalities in Massachusetts but they will have to submit a formal request connected with a legitimate criminal investigation.
The ACLU of Massachusetts contacted the City expressing concerns on how the data would be used. Proakis said Tuesday that he has started a conversation with the ACLU attorney who reached out to the City.
“This is an ongoing email conversation. They’ve responded to giving me some advice, both upon how our internal policy should work, as well as a particular concern related to the contract itself, and we’re moving forward on positive steps to try to do something that that that works within those recommendations,” Proakis said. “Ultimately, I see these discussions as being very beneficial. And helping our team accurately share information about the program and protect privacy as well. And as they progress, I can share more information about that.”
While the cameras have not been installed, Proakis said he signed a contract with Flock in September. He added that some have concerns about a section of the contract. Section 5.3 says, in part, “Flock could disclose data with law enforcement or government agencies if they have, quote, a good faith belief it will aid in addressing security, privacy, fraud or other things,” Proakis said.
He also reached out to Flock to discuss the contract language.
“They provided an explanation to me for why they put that particular language in the contract that way, in regards to, essentially, immediate emergency events. But realistically, I think that both sides realize that, as worded, that contract language is complicated and far from ideal,” Proakis said. “So we’ve requested language essentially limiting and tightening the circumstances, to essentially the types of judicial warrants that would necessitate release of data from a court, rather than circumstances that are as open as a language in 5.3.”
The City’s staff is creating a policy document for the Watertown Police Department, which Proakis said he expects to be complete “in coming weeks, before the system goes up.”
City Council President Mark Sideris requested that the Council receive the policy before it is approved so that it can be referred to a City Council subcommittee “for a very public discussion,” he said.
“I would appreciate if that would be done as soon as possible,” Sideris said.
Proakis said he also plans to discuss the Flock camera system, along with Police Department personnel, during one of the WPD’s Tuesday Night Talks. He said the meeting will take place in January at Hosmer Elementary School.
Flock in Other Communities
Watertown’s discussions about using the Flock Safety system comes at a time when a neighboring community is taking its system off line, and another is drafting its own ordinance for use of the cameras.
Cambridge voted to install the cameras in February but then voted on Oct. 20 to halt use of all Flock cameras until the company addressed fears about data access and enforcement risks, according to a report by Cambridge Day.
On Dec. 1, the City of Cambridge announced it is terminating its contract with Flock.
The City of Cambridge announcement said, in part: “… concerns about Flock were substantiated when they notified the City that two cameras were installed by their technicians in late November — without the City’s awareness — following an outstanding work order that should have been canceled when the City originally deactivated the cameras and account. Due to this material breach of our trust and the agreement, the City is terminating its contract with Flock Safety. The two cameras have also been removed.”
Meanwhile, officials in Waltham are drafting an ordinance for use of the 16 Flock cameras purchased for use by the Waltham Police Department.
According to a story by the Waltham Times, a Waltham City Councilor asked Waltham’s Law Department to include the following pieces in the ordnance: that city departments must get approval from the City Council to use any new surveillance technology, that city departments must publish guidelines on use of and access to information they obtain from the technology, that departments must publish annual reports on any surveillance technology usage, and that the city ban the use of facial recognition tools for surveillance.
The City of Waltham has installed 15 cameras, including one at the intersection of Main and Warren streets, near the Watertown line (near the Shell gas station by the Gore Estate), according to a Nov. 6 story published by the Waltham Times.