Across the country, law enforcement is launching the use of automated license plate readers to identify and track vehicles. This information can be used, with probable cause, for anything from tracking towed vehicles to investigating crimes committed.
There are two stationary cameras currently located in Wayland: one by the Loker Conservation Area driveway and the other near Reeves Hill. Police only use information gathered by the cameras to investigate crimes committed in the area, after filing a police report, according to Acting Police Chief Mark Hebert.
The use of cameras may spark privacy concerns, however, since ALPRs only collect data in public areas. Currently, Massachusetts does not have any laws restricting the collection and compilation of ALPR data. In other words, driving on a public road or walking in a public area puts you in the public view and you are therefore liable to data collection. Police will only use the data with probable cause to investigate a crime committed in that area or identify suspects for a crime.
No ALPR contract in Wayland
While this technology is present in Wayland and is used for town monitoring reasons, the Wayland Police Department does not have an active contract with any third-party ALPR companies. There have been instances where law enforcement has used ALPR data, after filing a report, but solely for investigative reasons and with probable cause. As a result, residents generally have less concern about privacy issues.
Third-party companies like Flock Safety monitor and do upkeep of the software, hardware, and maintenance. Without the third-party vendor the data acquired by the ALPR is stored within the town’s cloud or database. But a company like Flock usually implements measures like retention limits, encryption, and audit trails to protect against misuse of the information.
“There has not been much pushback from residents,” Hebert said. “I have received questions from residents in the past about what ALPRs are, and I have explained our current situation and I have not received many follow-up concerns.”
In Stow, the police department has cut ties with Flock after one of its officers allegedly obtained information from the system on numerous occasions to get information on someone they know.
The New Bedford and Lynn police departments are also investigating misuse by members of their forces.
However, pushback is strong elsewhere. An organization called Eyes Off Massachusetts strongly urges resistance; as its website proclaims, “AI mass surveillance is spreading like wildfire.”
The group also claims that while Flock ALPR cameras are marketed as anti-crime, they can be accessed by anyone at any time. This contradicts the information given by the police, so it’s hard to determine how credible the group is.
Within Wayland, some residents still have concerns about privacy.
“I’m concerned about how ALPRs gather so much personal information and then store it in such a centralized way,” resident Brendan McGonegal said.
McGonegal worries about the possibility of law enforcement misusing information pulled from a central database. However, he feels differently about independent cameras.
“I’m glad that’s how they decided to set them up,” McGonegal said. “If they don’t send info to a central server, it’s much more secure and reasonable as a noninvasive but still useful technological aid.”
Other residents’ opinions differ.
“I would say if I have nothing to hide then I probably don’t mind [the cameras],” Wayland resident Joe Vukson said. “People were definitely upset with the information Meta was gathering and selling to advertisers.”
