The Detroit Police Department (DPD) has integrated Flock Safety’s license plate cameras into its routine investigative operations, deploying hundreds of these always-on devices across the city. This expansive network, which records passing vehicles and collects data such as color and license plate numbers, shares information with dozens of law enforcement agencies throughout the metro Detroit area.
Between June 2025 and May 2026, Detroit police officers conducted at least 26,330 searches on Flock camera networks outside Michigan, averaging more than 78 searches daily, according to data compiled by FlockWatch. While DPD did not provide its own count of searches during this period, publicly available information suggests officers frequently utilize the system to locate stolen vehicles or missing individuals. The most common specific reason cited for searches was motor vehicle theft, although many searches were vaguely labeled "investigation."
The City of Detroit has committed $6.25 million to Flock Safety for its services through 2029, granting the department access to a national network of cameras operated by other agencies. DPD searches have accessed cameras managed by nine police agencies in seven different states. The volunteer-run website DeFlock reports that DPD operates 449 license plate reader cameras in total, with half being Flock cameras, approximately a third from Motorola Solutions, and the remainder from Genetec.
The widespread use of this technology has raised concerns among residents and civil liberties groups, who question whether the benefits outweigh the potential for misuse. Tawana Petty, a digital and data justice organizer and lifelong Detroiter, expressed worries that the network contributes to a "panoptic city" that links surveillance with safety, particularly at a time of rising authoritarianism and racial violence across the country.
In a 2023 transparency filing, DPD stated that license plate readers do not infringe on constitutionally protected information. The department also specified that officers are prohibited from using the technology to enforce traffic or immigration law and cannot use it in conjunction with facial recognition technology. Mandatory penalties are in place for officers who misuse the cameras. DPD spokesperson Jackson Vidaurri noted that many cases progress and are solved due to this technology, though he did not provide specific data. Flock Safety, the Atlanta-based company, did not respond to requests for comment.
DPD’s internal policy is to delete Flock “hits or reads” after 30 days unless they are being used for an ongoing investigation. The system includes features like FreeForm, a Flock product that allows police to conduct broad searches using plain language descriptions, combining what the company describes as "powerful AI" with "cross-agency access."
Examples of the cameras' use include an incident on January 21, where an officer noticed a car with a broken taillight near East Outer Drive. After the driver fled, officers searched the Flock network, which indicated the car was frequently in the area. This incident accounted for two of the 30 Flock searches by Detroit officers that day. In another instance, following Thanksgiving last year, officers near East 7 Mile Road and Conant Avenue received an alert about a car reported stolen by Eastpointe police. Detroit officers intercepted the vehicle and arrested the driver. (Eastpointe has since canceled its contract with Flock and launched an investigation into alleged misuse by its officers.)
Critics argue that surveillance technology, including Flock cameras, is prone to abuse. The nonprofit Institute for Justice has documented 236 cases of automated license plate reader misuse since 2018, with stalking, including tracking current or former romantic partners, being a common form of abuse. The technology can also be error-prone; in 2023, Detroit police detained a woman and her 2-year-old son based on an incorrect license plate reader match, resulting in a $35,000 settlement.
Gabrielle Dresner, a policy strategist for the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, noted that a statewide surveillance network can reveal personal details like where people live, work, and how they spend their time. She suggested a trade-off between privacy and perceived safety. Flock Safety itself has faced scrutiny for its practices, with reports detailing how it reportedly taught police to surveil protesters, misrepresented whether its cameras record video (they do), and developed features to track individuals rather than just vehicles. There have been instances of Flock cameras being used in sensitive investigations, such as surveilling a woman in Texas during a "death investigation" related to her abortion.
While the Flock network has contributed to solving at least some crimes, particularly motor vehicle thefts, it is not clear that the technology has broadly reduced crime in Detroit or significantly increased the overall number of solved cases. Crime in the city has been declining for years, mirroring a national trend that began before the expansion of the Flock network. However, Outlier Media’s analysis of FBI crime data indicated a slight increase in DPD's clearance rate for car thefts — the most common reason for Flock searches — from 4.1% to 5.1% after the city expanded its camera network in 2024.
The backlash against Flock Safety and digital surveillance technology is widespread, with hundreds of cities across the U.S. having rejected or terminated contracts. Cameras in the metro Detroit area have also been subjected to vandalism, reflecting a national pattern. This year, legislation was introduced in Michigan with the aim of limiting police use of license plate readers and regulating how the collected data is stored, signaling an ongoing debate about the balance between public safety and individual privacy in the deployment of such technology.