CINCINNATI — Amid a growing backlash to the use of Flock Safety cameras across the country and in Greater Cincinnati communities, Cincinnati City Council on Thursday adopted a motion that looks to create rules around how surveillance technology is used in the city.
The motion, introduced by council member Anna Albi, asks the city administration to provide council with an overview of how the city uses technology like license plate readers, cameras and drones. The presentation, which must be given to council within 30 days, will look at how the technology is deployed, how the data it collects is stored and who that data is shared with.
"These tools are vital as we think about how we solve crimes. Hopefully on the prevention side, but definitely when we talk about solving crimes," Albi said. "We have to be able to balance the need to address the crime-solving part of this and how important these tools are, with the need to also protect people's civil liberties against government overreach."
WATCH: Cincinnati City Council wants to create rules around surveillance technology use in the city. Here's what it might entail
While nationally, the fervor to phase out Flock cameras has hit a fever pitch, the Atlanta-based company is not a city vendor. Albi said the city has contracts with companies Axon and Motorola for the tech and currently appears to be "using best practices," like not using facial recognition software.
"I will emphasize, Cincinnati police do not have a contract with Flock," she said. "A key difference is the contract terms and how accessible Flock information is to anyone who's on the Flock system. Cincinnati has a closed system; only Cincinnati PD can access our surveillance data."
The motion also asks the city administration to draft an ordinance that would create a surveillance use policy and surveillance annual impact report while putting limits on data storage and sharing.
"If our policy is solid and we feel good about the data retention and the data sharing pieces of how we operate today, let's enshrine it into law," Albi said. "I'm also looking into publishing a surveillance usage report each year. This is something the city of Dayton does, and that report would include what type of technologies we use, details about that data sharing, who has access, what the costs are of these technologies and more."
During the meeting on Thursday, President Pro Tem Scotty Johnson shared some reservations, fearing it may hamper police work.
"We do have to make sure that we are participating in the best practices in Cincinnati, and we are," Johnson said. "I will not support anything that eliminates tools in the tool belt for the Cincinnati Police to continue to do the outstanding job that they've done."
Albi said that while, generally, best practices seem to already be in place, some people in Cincinnati may be unaware of it.
"Let's talk publicly about what type of surveillance technologies the city is using, what it looks like for data sharing, how long we're retaining that data, all of that information. Let's have a public, transparent conversation. Because, honestly, from everything I've heard from CPD and (the law department), Cincinnati is doing it right," she said.
The actions come amid a wave of moves in Greater Cincinnati to limit or end the use of surveillance technology.
In the city of Covington on Tuesday, leaders voted down funding for automatic license plate readers used by the Covington Police Department. That same day, Lebanon City Council voted to pause its Flock camera program, temporarily disabling the cameras while city staff investigates the contract and determines whether the city can exit the agreement. And this past July, in Newport, the city ended its Flock pilot program, promising to remove the cameras from the city and not move forward with purchasing the technology.
The Hamilton County Sheriff's Office also recently announced it is pausing its use of 75 Flock cameras across the county. During a Sept. 3 press conference, Sheriff Charmaine McGuffey said she's instituting the pause because she wants several changes from Flock, including clear guidelines on who the information obtained from vehicles is shared with, where it goes when it's collected and more.
