Arizona AG launches statewide review of Flock license plate cameras as cities cut ties

Arizona AG launches statewide review of Flock license plate cameras as cities cut ties

Coverage spread: 4 sources — 4 unrated

Lean ratings via AllSides / Media Bias-Fact-Check. How this works.

Where they agree

  • Arizona AG Kris Mayes launched a statewide review of Flock Safety and other license plate reader systems, citing privacy and constitutional concerns.
  • Tempe and Cave Creek both ended their Flock contracts and shut down cameras in late August, following Surprise, Chandler and Pinal County.
  • Several of the cancellations were driven by documented misuse, audits, or privacy worries, though not every city found wrongdoing by its own officers.
  • Apache Junction chose to keep its cameras despite a documented misuse case, citing the technology’s crime-fighting value.

Where they differ

  • AZFamily centers its coverage on the AG’s review announcement and pairs it with a separate, unrelated Texas case of extreme officer misuse for context; other outlets don’t mention the Texas case at all.
  • ABC15 and 12 News focus heavily on the Surprise officer being cleared of misuse and attributing the anomaly to a technical glitch, while FOX 10 mentions this only briefly.
  • FOX 10 is the only outlet to tie the story to state politics, reporting that both gubernatorial candidates, Katie Hobbs and Andy Biggs, addressed Flock cameras at a law enforcement forum.
  • FOX 10 provides the most detail on Cave Creek’s specific reasoning (camera theft, inability to contain data-sharing beyond town jurisdiction), while other outlets give only brief mentions of Cave Creek’s decision.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes announced on Aug. 27 a statewide review of Flock Safety license plate readers and similar systems used by police, after weeks of controversy over misuse and privacy. The review comes as Tempe and Cave Creek became the latest Arizona cities to shut down their Flock cameras and end their contracts, joining Surprise, Pinal County and Chandler in scaling back or dropping the technology.

What is the Arizona attorney general actually reviewing?

Mayes’ office says it will examine how license plate reader cameras have been used by police departments statewide, what impact they have on residents’ privacy, and whether their use raises constitutional concerns. The findings will be turned into a report delivered to state lawmakers and the Governor’s Office. The review isn’t limited to Flock Safety — it will also cover Axon, a competitor some cities are turning to as they move away from Flock. Mayes said the technology “can play an important role” in fighting crime but that its use “must be balanced against the Constitution and Arizonans’ privacy rights.”

Which Arizona cities have dropped Flock, and why?

Tempe powered down all 33 of its Flock cameras on Aug. 26 and says it will end its contract entirely, with no plans to replace the system — including ending a pilot program with Axon. Mayor Corey Woods said Tempe’s own police found no evidence its cameras had been misused, but that “the risk of misuse is too great” given the broader statewide concerns about privacy. Physical cameras may stay up until Flock removes them, though the city says no new data is being collected and any stored data auto-deletes after 30 days. Tempe City Councilman Bobby Nichols said he’d been pushing for changes since last October, framing the issue as a Fourth Amendment privacy right.

Cave Creek ended its contract the same day, citing resident concerns, the theft of one of its cameras at 32nd Street and Carefree Highway, and a realization that local privacy safeguards couldn’t stop data from being shared with outside agencies through Flock’s networked system. The town manager and attorney are set to formally address the termination at a Sept. 1 council meeting. Surprise and Chandler had earlier suspended their systems after audits flagged possible officer misuse, and Pinal County has also ended or announced plans to end its program. Apache Junction, by contrast, is keeping its cameras despite a case in which a former officer used the system to track his wife, arguing the technology has helped locate missing people and suspects.

What happened with the Surprise officer under investigation?

Surprise police said an investigation cleared the officer whose unusual system activity triggered the city’s Aug. 13 suspension of its cameras. Investigators attributed the flagged activity to a technical anomaly rather than a policy violation, and the officer — who had been on routine administrative leave — was set to return to full duty. Police Chief Evan Becher said the department disclosed the anomaly to the public as soon as it was found, framing that transparency as central to maintaining trust.

How does this connect to the Texas case cited in coverage?

Some outlets tied the Arizona controversy to a case out of Lufkin, Texas, where officer Zachary Anthony Klein, 32, was indicted after an audit found he’d searched his ex-girlfriend’s license plate more than 10,000 times using Flock, along with searches on her family members and past romantic partners. An affidavit says the searches, made from a personal cell phone over roughly a year and a half, had no connection to any active investigations, and that the ex-girlfriend told Texas Rangers Klein had once threatened to find and kill someone she’d previously dated. Klein faces charges including tampering with government records and misuse of official information.

Why does this matter beyond individual cities?

The wave of contract cancellations and the AG’s review reflect a broader reckoning over automated license plate readers, which log vehicle movements at scale and can be queried by officers with little oversight unless departments audit usage closely. Arizona’s Flock debate has also become a campaign issue: at an Arizona Police Association forum at ASU’s downtown Phoenix campus, both major candidates for governor — Gov. Katie Hobbs and Rep. Andy Biggs — fielded questions on the technology, underscoring that the fight over surveillance cameras versus privacy protections is likely to shape state policy well beyond the current round of city-level decisions.

Sources

Featured photo: Lightandtruth via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top