Editor's note: This story was produced for the ear and designed to be heard. If you're able, we encourages you to listen to the audio version of this story by clicking the LISTEN button above.
As cars whizz by in a busy intersection in downtown Saginaw, each and every one of them is being tracked by four cameras on nearby light poles at the intersection of Court St. and S. Michigan Ave. The cameras are owned by the company Avigilon.
Automated license plate readers have been popping up on roadsides across Michigan. They can record vital details about a car to help police investigations.
These cameras don't just collect video, they are assisted by artificial intelligence. They can pick up details like license plates, damage on a bumper, and the make and model of a vehicle. One of the largest makers of these cameras is Flock Safety, with over 160 Michigan law enforcement agencies partnering with them.
Officers have praised the technology, saying it helps solve crimes other cameras can't catch. However, critics argue the data collected by the cameras could fall into the wrong hands and jeopardize privacy. Now, several communities across the state are having a reckoning with these cameras as public officials seek to balance safety and concerns over civil liberties.
'I just don't want to give up any more liberties.'
At a Bay City commission meeting late last year, officials considered whether to retain the usage of Flock cameras in the city.
Flock did not speak to us about this story, but company representative Trevor Chandler spoke at the November meeting. He said the technology is responsible for a 41% drop in car theft and an increase in arrests by 46% in San Francisco.
"Not only are auto thefts going down, but for the ones that remain, the arrests for them are going up," he said.
Local police departments have the option to share data with other agencies across America, Flock offers a Nationwide Lookup Tool. Chandler insists that Flock does not own or sell the data they collect and all data is purged after 30 days.
"Every single agency, every single community that purchases Flock owns their own data, and they get to choose if they want to share," Chandler said.
Despite Flock's assurances that their data is secure, people in Bay City voiced concerns at the meeting.
"I just don't want to give up any more liberties," said Rick Mastroianni hitting his hand against the lectern.
"We could be putting money into better education systems, more things for the youth to do," said Amanda Fenner, who held a cardboard sign that read "Block Flock Vote No!"
"Flock can hand our data over to anyone, law enforcement, government officials, or private parties," said Adam Reddick, referring to a clause in the Flock contract with Bay City.
The clause, section 5.3, says the company "may access, use, preserve and/or disclose the Customer Data," to government officials and law enforcement if legally required to do so.
There are now no more publicly operated cameras in Bay City because the Commission voted to reject a new contract with the company. The contract would have cost the city $84,150, with $45,150 being the subtotal for the first year.
'It helps us catch a criminal.'
As one city rejects the cameras, communities across Grand Traverse County are having a reckoning about them.
According to Grand Traverse County Undersheriff Randy Fewless, the county has 27 Flock cameras across three local communities, including Garfield Township, East Bay Township and Peninsula Township. Over 150,000 cars have been detected in the last 30 days.
"It's not just about it being a camera system to help fight crime. It's about a corporation or a company having access to all of this data," said Dakota Stebbins, a 31-year-old lifelong resident of Traverse City. After he posted a map of Flock cameras in the area onto a Facebook group hundreds were outraged.
Stebbins says he's concerned about the security of the data the cameras collect. Fewless says Flock cameras have helped solve crimes that otherwise wouldn't have been solved, including missing persons cases and break-ins.
"It's taking a picture of basically the back of your car. And unless that information needs to be accessed for some type of investigation, then that information is never accessed and basically is deleted after 30 days," Fewless said.
Fewless added that the Sheriff's Department and the company gave public presentations on how the cameras work and there are policies in place to protect data.
He says most of the feedback has been positive. "If it helps us catch a criminal," Fewless said, "It's saving some of our other citizens and or businesses from being victimized."
Michigan does not yet have laws regulating the usage of automated license plate readers.
There is a bipartisan package of bills in the state House that would create rules for these cameras. They would require data to be deleted after 14 days unless there is an investigation, among other provisions.
Flock and the ACLU have worked together to successfully push similar bills in Virginia.
WCMU's Rick Brewer contributed reporting to this story. Copyright 2026 WCMU
