
A detailed investigation into how Flock Safety’s ALPR network in Washington has exposed residents, including marginalized communities, to federal overreach, privacy risks, and widespread surveillance misuse.
Newcastle, WA — For years, cities across Washington have installed Flock Safety’s Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras under the promise of safer streets, modern policing, and faster crime solving. These cameras watch every car that passes, analyze license plates, record vehicle details, and store that data in a centralized cloud system.
What most people did not know is how far that data travels.
University of Washington researchers discovered that at least 18 Washington agencies had their ALPR data accessed by federal immigration authorities. A Texas sheriff used Washington’s ALPR data to track a woman who had an abortion. Thousands of unauthorized searches were made through features local agencies did not know existed, such as a vendor controlled pilot program and an automatically enabled National Lookup function.
And in November 2025, a Washington judge ruled that all Flock camera images and metadata are public records. This means any private resident or stranger could legally request and receive images of every car captured in the system. The ruling caused multiple cities and counties to shut their cameras off immediately, citing public safety and privacy concerns.
This article explains how we reached this crisis, how ALPR surveillance is being misused across the country, how it threatens marginalized communities (including LGBTQIA+ people, immigrants, and abortion seekers), and what residents in Newcastle should know about the system operating in their own backyard.
Flock cameras are solar powered devices that capture every vehicle passing through their field of view. They store:
Flock then uploads everything to a centralized, nationwide database searchable by more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies.
This is not a local tool. This is a national surveillance network.
The system allows officers to:
The technology does not target individual suspects. It captures everybody.
The University of Washington Center for Human Rights (UWCHR) uncovered three ways federal agencies accessed Washington data.
Local agencies explicitly enabled data sharing with U.S. Border Patrol or Homeland Security Investigations. At least eight Washington police departments did this in 2025.
Flock allowed agencies like Border Patrol to run searches without the local agency’s knowledge. This happened through:
At least ten Washington departments had thousands of federal searches performed on their data this way.
Local officers ran searches on behalf of federal agencies.
Example:
A Yakima County Sheriff’s Office user searched 89 networks with the reason listed as “ICE.”
Washington’s Keep Washington Working Act forbids local agencies from assisting with federal civil immigration enforcement.
But the audits showed:
Federal agencies gained effective access even when cities believed they had disabled sharing.
After Texas banned abortion, a Texas sheriff used Flock’s national network to locate a woman who had self managed an abortion.
He searched ALPR systems in Prosser, Yakima, and the King County Housing Authority.
Washington’s shield law was designed to prevent exactly this.
ALPR data made that protection meaningless.
ALPR data can expose:
For communities already targeted politically and legally, mass location tracking is a direct threat to safety.
In August 2025, Redmond police surrounded the home of Thor Andrews Sr. and handcuffed him in his driveway. A Flock alert flagged his car as “associated” with his son, who had a felony warrant.
The car was registered to the father, not the son. Police records already showed this. The system still triggered a full tactical response.
Mr. Andrews later said:
“What if my grandson had been in the vehicle and they thought I was reaching for something. It could have gone a very different way.”
This incident is not an anomaly. It is the predictable outcome of automated suspicion.
On November 6, 2025, a Washington judge ruled that:
Flock ALPR images and data are public records.
This means:
Multiple cities shut their systems off within days, including Skamania County, Sedro-Woolley, Stanwood, Lynnwood, and Redmond.
Officials warned this ruling created a mechanism for stalking, harassment, and surveillance of private citizens by private citizens.
Newcastle contracts its police services through the King County Sheriff’s Office. KCSO sets the rules, administrators, and access controls for Newcastle’s six Flock cameras.
Newcastle’s policy says the cameras:
Even with local protections, Flock’s national design lets data flow to thousands of agencies unless features like National Lookup are deliberately disabled.
Many cities did not know the feature was active.
Exact numbers are not published, but typical pricing:
Newcastle has six cameras. Annual estimate:
$18,000 to $30,000 per year.
Since Newcastle contracts through KCSO, these costs are folded into a larger multi million dollar contract budget and rarely itemized.
Last 30 days:
For drivers who use Coal Creek Parkway, that often means multiple scans every day.
At a March 2025 council meeting, resident Steven Vimes warned:
“This raises Carpenter era privacy questions about prolonged tracking.”
Now, with the statewide court ruling, every image these cameras capture may be subject to release.
Surveillance vendors and police agencies repeat the same talking points when promoting ALPR systems. Research shows these claims rarely hold up.
Below is the debunked list, curated from academic research, investigative journalism, civil rights groups, and nationwide data.
Reality: Crime has fallen nationwide for decades independent of ALPR use. A 16 year study in Piedmont, CA found no statistical evidence that ALPRs reduce stolen vehicle rates.
Reality: Less than 0.3 percent of ALPR “hits” produce useful leads, even in well studied cities.
Reality: ALPRs collect data on everyone. This includes where you go, who you visit, which doctors you see, which protests you attend, and which organizations you support.
Reality: A fleeting glance is not the same as a permanent, searchable, nationwide recording.
Reality: Standard Flock contracts give the company a broad license to use data as it wishes. And data is accessible to any authorized agency in the nationwide network unless manually restricted.
Reality: Flock uses AI to capture far more, including bumper stickers, occupants, unique features, and contextual details that reveal sensitive information.
Reality: Many contracts are signed without council oversight. Cities often misunderstand the technical features.
Reality: It has been used to track immigrants, abortion seekers, estranged partners, and people traveling for protected healthcare.
A condensed timeline of major WA events:
This timeline shows how rapidly the situation escalated once federal access became public.
Newcastle’s cameras are part of the same statewide and national network.
Given what we now know, residents should insist on answers to these questions:
The system impacts everyone, not just suspects. It affects immigrants, LGBTQIA+ residents, people seeking reproductive or gender affirming care, survivors of domestic violence, and anyone who values privacy and safety.
Newcastle now faces a choice:
As Redmond, Lynnwood, Skamania County, Sedro-Woolley, and others have done.
Including an accounting of all past data sharing.
Audit logs should be published monthly.
Consistent with state law.
Residents must be heard, especially those from marginalized groups who face the greatest harm.
Flock cameras were marketed as modern crime fighting tools. But they have created a sprawling surveillance network that undermines Washington’s laws, exposes residents to federal overreach, risks public disclosure of sensitive travel data, and has directly harmed residents here in our state.
Newcastle deserves the truth and the right to decide whether this system should remain in place.
Now that the full picture is clear, it is time for residents, advocates, and city leaders to have a real conversation about the future of surveillance in our community.
--