The Watchful Eye: How South Bend police balance safety and privacy with camera network

SOUTH BEND, Ind. -- Dotted on the edges of numerous intersections are black cameras, tracking the movement of thousands of cars that drive under their gaze.

These automatic license plate reader cameras are operated by Flock Safety, a private surveillance company with tens of thousands of AI powered cameras in more than 5,000 communities across the country.

LPR cameras capture license plate images and other vehicle details like make, model, or type of vehicle, according to Flock’s Director of Communications Holly Beilin.

“That technology we actually refer to as our ‘vehicle fingerprint,’” Beilin said. “It uses machine learning to categorize the vehicle, and they provide alerts if that vehicle is known to be stolen, associated with a known wanted offender, or associated with a missing person.”

The South Bend Police Department utilizes 45 Flock cameras that were first installed in August 2021 across the city, with its numbers gradually increasing over the past few years.

At the department’s second quarterly public safety meeting this year, SBPD Assistant Chief Dan Skibins highlighted several cases where officers successfully used Flock cameras, including an abduction of a two-year-old child.

 Before putting out an Amber Alert, Skibins said officers first utilized the Flock cameras.

“The Real Time Crime Center began working, putting information out into our license plate readers to identify the suspect vehicle that was involved,” Skibins said. “Those officers were again able to quickly respond and find the vehicle and bring the child to safety.”

In 2024, Flock LPR cameras assisted SBPD in a total of 151 cases including in about 10% of reported motor vehicle thefts and 50 percent of reported homicides.

So far in 2025, Flock cameras have assisted in 80 cases including in around 17 percent of reported motor vehicle thefts.

Beyond local law enforcement, private companies like FedEx and Simon Malls can also pay to have access to Flock’s cameras, according to a Forbes investigation. Starting in fall, these customers will be able to request a live feed or 15 second video clips from LPR cameras.

“You can sort of think of that like an iPhone live video or a live photo,” Beilin said. “It's a burst of the images that are captured on the license plate readers that will be strung together to [make] a 15 second video clip.”

Yet, many civil liberties experts are concerned with how much data is collected and then how it is stored and used.

“Once there's a private company involved that's holding that data that then can monetize that data … it just raises a level of concern when it's a public agency recording that information, and then that information is stored and can be used by any number of private agencies,” said Indiana ACLU Executive Director Chris Daley.

The SBPD stores data from Flock cameras for 30 days, the standard time allowed by Flock’s records retention policy.

Additionally, Skibins said SBPD only allows investigators, lieutenants, and captains on shift access to the LPR cameras.

“Each officer is audited about once a year to make sure that they're entering case numbers and that they’re not just running random plates in the system,” Skibins said. “They have to have a case associated with it and our analysts look at that audit and go back and make sure that the case is relevant to why they would be using the LPR system.”

However, other agencies with access to Flock can also access South Bend’s Flock data. Each Flock camera is connected to a national network.

According to multiple outlets, Flock’s network is being used by local law enforcement on behalf of immigration authorities.

In a letter sent to Flock last Thursday, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) raised concerns about federal and local law enforcement using Flock LPR cameras to track people across state lines.

He highlighted reports of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents using Flock data for immigration-related searches, even when local laws prevent such surveillance.

“Given the vast amount of data collected by Flock cameras, and the enormous potential for abuse, it is critical that Flock, law enforcement entities, and state and local governments are transparent and accountable for how this sensitive data is accessed and by whom,” the letter reads in part.

In data published by “Muck Rock,” there is no evidence that the SBPD used the Flock network for immigration in the past few years.

When considering the increased surveillance capability of the Flock cameras, Skibins said the city’s legal team would ensure it does not violate people’s rights before possibly implementing it.

Yet, some civil liberties groups still argue the very existence of Flock’s network violates people’s privacy rights.

“As technology evolves, we know it's going to create new challenges for civil liberties,” Daley said.

A federal lawsuit filed in Virginia last October alleges Flock’s widespread surveillance is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

The lawsuit is set to hear arguments in October.

“The City of Norfolk, Virginia has installed a network of cameras that make it functionally impossible for people to drive anywhere without having their moments tracked, photographed, and stored in an AI-assisted database that enables the warrantless surveillance of their every move,” the lawsuit reads in part.

Yet, Daley points to a middle ground, arguing that law enforcement needs to keep the community safe while also respecting the public’s rights.

“We want law enforcement to be able to do their jobs. We just always want to point back to the fact that that needs to be done in a way that respects the right to privacy that we have in this country, that we hold dear,” Daley said. "When it doesn't, we need law enforcement to make adjustments so that they're actually using this new technology in a way that comports with our constitution.”