Browse
Log in / Register
Share
April 1, 2025 — Law enforcement in Columbus County, North Carolina, is facing growing public scrutiny over the use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) from Flock Safety. Residents have raised questions about how the cameras are deployed, how long data is stored, and whether they infringe on privacy rights. In response, both the Whiteville Police Department and the Columbus County Sheriff’s Office have offered detailed explanations of their policies, while also acknowledging the need for clearer regulations.
The debate comes amid a nationwide push for stricter oversight of ALPR technology. Flock cameras, which capture images of vehicle license plates at entry points, have been criticized by civil liberties groups for enabling mass surveillance without warrants. However, local officials argue the tools are essential for solving crimes and locating missing persons.
Whiteville Police Chief Paul Rockenbach emphasized that the city’s nine Flock cameras — one of which is mobile — are used exclusively for investigative purposes. “We do not track people as they move through the city, and there is no facial recognition capability,” Rockenbach said in an interview. The cameras are placed at major entrances to the city and photograph plates only when a vehicle passes. Alerts are triggered only when a plate matches a vehicle linked to a known crime—either within Whiteville or in a neighboring jurisdiction.
Currently, the Whiteville Police Department stores plate data for 30 days. But Rockenbach confirmed the department plans to reduce that to seven days, aligning with Flock Safety’s updated recommendations. “We want to be transparent about how we use this technology,” he said. “As law enforcement leaders, we must keep open conversations with the community and hold our officers accountable.”
Rockenbach also noted that the cameras have already proven valuable: they helped locate a homicide suspect and aided in other serious investigations. He acknowledged that recent headlines about misuse of Flock cameras by officers in other states have eroded public trust, but he assured residents that Whiteville officers are trained not to abuse the system.
David Gross, a Whiteville resident, expressed skepticism. “Maybe if there were better controls or clearer rules, I’d feel differently. But it seems like if you have a badge, you can look up anything and track anyone. That doesn’t sit right with me,” Gross said. He called for independent auditing and a requirement that searches be tied to a specific, documented investigation.
Civil liberties experts echo those concerns. “Without a warrant standard, ALPR systems can become a surveillance dragnet,” said Jamal Green, a privacy attorney who consults on Fourth Amendment issues. “The 30-day or 90-day retention windows are far longer than what is needed for legitimate law enforcement, and that creates a risk of mission creep.”
Columbus County Sheriff Bill Rogers said his office operates five Flock cameras placed around the county. One camera was recently stolen from the Tabor City area, an incident that remains under investigation. Rogers defended the technology, saying it “does more good than harm.” He highlighted cases where the plate readers helped locate missing elderly individuals with dementia or Alzheimer’s.
“We keep data for 90 days because some investigations, like homicides or missing persons, take time to build a timeline,” Rogers explained. “The cameras give us leads we wouldn’t otherwise have.” He added that the sheriff’s office does not allow officers to search the database randomly; every query requires a case number.
Flock Safety, the company behind the cameras, recently updated its own default data retention recommendation from 30 days to 7 days, citing privacy-by-design principles. The company has also introduced audit logs that allow agencies to track who viewed which plate data and when. However, enforcement of these policies remains voluntary unless codified into law.
In North Carolina, state lawmakers are considering a bill that would require all ALPR users to obtain a warrant before searching data from devices not owned by the agency. The bill, introduced in March 2025, would also mandate public reporting of how many queries are made each month. Columbus County officials have not taken a formal position on the bill.
The Columbus County situation mirrors a broader national debate. Police departments in Texas, California, and Florida have faced lawsuits over unauthorized use of Flock cameras. Meanwhile, supporters argue that ALPRs are a force multiplier, especially in rural areas with limited resources.
“The key is to have a clear policy, a retention schedule that makes sense, and oversight,” said Chief Rockenbach. “We’re not trying to spy on anyone. We’re trying to solve crimes and keep people safe. But we have to earn that trust every day.”
As the conversation continues, both agencies plan to host public forums in the coming weeks to address resident questions directly. The stolen camera in Tabor City has also raised security concerns about the physical vulnerability of the equipment.
This article was updated on April 1, 2025, to include expert commentary and information on pending state legislation. Flock Safety did not respond to a request for comment.
