ATLANTA, Aug. 13 (Our Los Angeles) — Flock Safety, the company behind a large network of automated license-plate readers, says it will shorten the default time it keeps vehicle-location data and add new controls for police searches. The changes come as law-enforcement agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department, face criticism over privacy, data sharing and alleged misuse of the technology.
Flock announced Aug. 13 that its default retention period for vehicle-location data would fall from 30 days to seven days. The company said agencies could keep information longer for active investigations through a new feature called “Evidence Mode,” subject to state and local policies.
The announcement does not mean that all data will be deleted after seven days in every location. Flock said local agencies can apply different rules, and the exact effect of the default in California was not established in the information available.
What the technology does
Automated license-plate reader, or ALPR, cameras capture images of vehicles and record information such as license-plate numbers, the time of a sighting and the camera’s location. Police can search the records to investigate where a vehicle may have been seen.
The systems are generally used to locate vehicles connected to investigations, such as stolen cars or other reported crimes. But because a camera can record vehicles that are not suspected of wrongdoing, privacy advocates have raised concerns about the creation of location histories for large numbers of people.
Flock’s announcement followed reporting and criticism alleging that officers had used license-plate reader systems for improper searches, including searches involving romantic partners. The supplied information does not identify the officers or provide the outcomes of those cases.
What Flock says will change
Flock said every search will require a stated reason and a case code. The company said there will be an emergency override for situations such as a missing-child investigation.
The company also said its Audit Assistance system will become standard for all law-enforcement customers. The system is designed to identify unusual search activity and can lock a user out while an administrator reviews the activity.
Another change would give local agencies more control over searches by outside agencies. Flock said a local agency could decide which categories of offenses outside agencies may use when searching its camera data. The controls could block searches connected to immigration enforcement.
Flock CEO Garrett Langley said in an interview that “the data shouldn’t be monetized.” Flock has also said the new rules are intended to make access to the network more accountable.
The American Civil Liberties Union criticized the announcement, calling the changes “a thinly veiled PR attempt” and saying the security promises did not adequately address concerns about mass surveillance. That is the ACLU’s characterization, not a court finding.
Why Los Angeles matters
The LAPD operates or operated 138 Flock cameras in Los Angeles. The department’s agreement with Flock, entered into in 2023, expired in June 2026. Reports have variously described the department’s response as a pause in use, a decision not to renew the agreement or an expiration without renewal.
LAPD Chief Information Officer Dean Gialamas said the department had concerns about civil liberties, privacy, data ownership and how information could be shared. “The sticking point is around having very clear terms about who owns the data, what happens with the data once they collect it,” he said.
The Los Angeles City Council also became involved. In late May 2026, Councilmember Ysabel Jurado introduced a motion asking the Board of Police Commissioners not to approve new Flock agreements or pilot programs.
LAPD and Flock were reported to be discussing a revised agreement. The proposed terms would give LAPD ownership of data and metadata collected by the cameras and restrict Flock from distributing that information to another entity or using it to train artificial-intelligence systems.
The department’s data-sharing concerns have included possible access by federal immigration authorities. LAPD has said its data was not used to assist U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. The supplied information does not include a statement from ICE.
What remains unresolved
The reforms address how long data is kept, how searches are documented and how agencies can control outside access. They do not by themselves resolve broader questions about whether police should collect vehicle-location information at this scale, how agencies oversee searches or what legal protections apply to the data.
It also remains unclear whether LAPD has resumed using Flock cameras or finalized a new agreement. The available information does not include the proposed contract, the full inspector general report or the text of the Los Angeles City Council motion.
