MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Alabama lawmakers are preparing to revisit statewide limits on automated license plate readers as scrutiny intensifies over the expanding network of Flock Safety cameras, recent misuse cases involving two St. Clair County police departments and concerns about how long vehicle-location data can be retained and shared.
State Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, said he intends to introduce legislation in the 2027 session that would add stronger guardrails around the cameras, including potential warrant requirements for some searches, shorter data-retention periods and tougher consequences for improper use. Alabama already has administrative rules for license plate reader systems, but it does not have a statute specifically tailored to the technology.
“What is totally unacceptable is that we keep the current status quo,” Orr told WSFA. “We just have to get some guardrails and parameters on these cameras if we’re going to allow their continued use in the state of Alabama.”
Flock cameras, also known as automated license plate readers or ALPRs, photograph vehicles passing a camera and record license plate numbers, vehicle descriptions, locations and timestamps. The information can be searched by law enforcement agencies investigating crimes, locating stolen vehicles, finding missing people or identifying vehicles connected to an alert. Flock cameras also can be owned by businesses, homeowners associations and other private entities that choose to share data with police.
The debate unfolding in Alabama reflects a broader national backlash against the rapid growth of vehicle-surveillance networks. Civil-liberties advocates and some elected officials argue that systems designed to identify stolen cars or fleeing suspects can also produce a searchable history of ordinary people’s movements, often without a warrant. Law enforcement agencies, meanwhile, say the cameras are increasingly important investigative tools.
Alabama’s current rules, adopted by the Alabama Justice Information Commission and effective in 2022, allow law enforcement agencies to use license plate reader data for criminal justice or public-safety purposes, including finding missing people, investigating trafficking and other crime, and determining a vehicle’s ownership, location or identity. The rules prohibit the sale of the data and bar its sharing for noncriminal-justice and non-public-safety purposes.
The rules also require agencies that capture or use the data to keep an access log identifying the user, the date and time of access and the purpose of the search. Agencies may share data with other criminal justice agencies for public-safety or criminal-justice purposes, but must maintain dissemination logs. Data and access logs generally may be kept for as long as five years, with records tied to an active investigation or pending case eligible for longer retention.
Orr sponsored Senate Bill 2 in 2021, which would have established statutory rules for automated license plate readers. The Senate passed the measure unanimously, but it stalled in the House. The proposal called for written, public policies governing use of the systems, secure handling of the data and restrictions on selling or sharing it outside law enforcement.
Orr now says the state needs a more restrictive framework. He told 256 Today that officers could still use the technology without delay during emergencies, such as an abduction or a bank robbery involving a known vehicle, but should need a warrant for nonemergency searches of historical data.
“But in non-emergency type situations, I think we need to require a warrant,” Orr said.
He said he would favor a retention period of a year or less, rather than Alabama’s existing five-year maximum, and questioned whether a misdemeanor penalty would be sufficient for an officer who searches the system for personal reasons.
The issue took on new urgency in July after two St. Clair County departments reported policy violations involving Flock systems.
Moody Police Chief Reece Smith told ABC 33/40 that an officer was fired July 16 after an internal investigation found the officer violated the department’s license plate reader policy. The department forwarded its findings to the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency for review. Moody did not identify the officer or disclose additional details of the violation, citing personnel policies.
In Springville, Police Chief Jason Mize said an audit found that searches had been conducted involving a family member of a now-former officer. Mize said the officer resigned July 8, the family member was notified and the findings also were sent to ALEA. The department said the unauthorized searches occurred in one day.
The cases also demonstrated why access logs and regular audits matter, supporters of stronger safeguards say. But they have produced different conclusions about the technology itself.
Moody Mayor Nick Rutledge said the city’s safeguards worked because the alleged misconduct was identified through internal controls and resulted in action. He called license plate readers “a very useful tool” for public safety while pledging zero tolerance for misuse.
Flock founder and CEO Garrett Langley similarly said officers should have “a legitimate law enforcement investigative use case” before conducting a search, while acknowledging that audits have shown “not every officer has followed a policy that we think is good enough.”
The debate is especially consequential in Alabama because Flock and similar camera systems have spread widely through partnerships between local governments, law enforcement agencies and Alabama Power.
Inside Climate News reported that Alabama Power has marketed Flock and related surveillance technology to municipalities since at least 2019, installing and maintaining equipment on utility poles. A company representative said in 2025 that Alabama Power had partnered with more than 80 municipalities statewide for subscription-based surveillance services. Alabama Power said it installs and maintains the equipment but does not operate the system or have access to the data, which it said belongs to program participants.
The report, based on open-records requests and public databases, found more than 3 million searches of Flock data by Alabama customers and more than 180 Alabama local governments or police departments with users who had searched the system.
Birmingham has become one of the state’s largest users. The Birmingham City Council in 2025 approved a $9.7 million agreement with Alabama Power to install and maintain 100 additional cameras and license plate readers, adding to 330 cameras approved a year earlier, according to Inside Climate News. The report said city officials described Alabama Power’s infrastructure and access to poles as a practical way to expand the network.
The expansion has raised questions that go beyond the cameras’ usefulness in a single case: Who can search the data, what information can be shared across jurisdictions, how long the data can remain available and whether the public receives enough notice or input before cameras are installed.
State Sen. Robert Stewart, D-Selma, told WSFA that he supports fighting crime but is concerned about the technology’s broader implications.
“I am concerned about the expansion of the surveillance state,” Stewart said. “Yes, it is important to fight crime but not at the expansion and the erosion of civil liberties.”
The Alabama discussion comes as more state and local governments reconsider their approach to automated license plate readers. At least 16 states have statutes expressly addressing ALPR use or data retention, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, although rules vary widely. Connecticut, Oregon, Virginia and Washington have been cited as among states with more comprehensive privacy protections, while many states leave decisions largely to local agency policy.
More than 50 agencies or communities nationwide had canceled, suspended, rejected or deactivated Flock contracts by mid-August, according to a tracker maintained by DeFlock, a grassroots group that opposes the systems. Concerns have centered on access to data, potentially improper personal searches, immigration-related sharing, mistaken plate-reader alerts and the scope of warrantless vehicle tracking.
Flock announced policy changes this month that the company says are intended to increase oversight. The changes include requiring law enforcement users to associate searches with a case code, using tools to flag unusual search activity and allowing agencies to restrict searches by outside departments based on offense type. The company also said it would recommend a seven-day default retention period, rather than 30 days, although customers and local laws can affect how long records are retained.
Flock’s evidence policy, updated Aug. 12, says customer agencies own and control the data generated through the platform and that data is permanently deleted after the applicable retention period. The policy contains references to both a seven-day default period and a 30-day standard retention period, underscoring the importance of agency-specific agreements and public disclosure of local retention policies.
For Orr, the question is not whether Alabama should abandon technology that can help find missing people, recover stolen vehicles and investigate crimes. It is whether the state can permit its use without allowing the surveillance system to become an unchecked record of residents’ daily lives.
“We can’t just roll over and say, ‘Oh, we trust you to do the right thing 100% of the time, anywhere, everywhere, with all this technology at your fingertips and the ability to snoop and spy on people with impunity,’” Orr told 256 Today. “That’s a nonstarter for me.”