A heated discussion on data privacy and surveillance technology unfolded during the recent Bay City government meeting, raising critical questions about the use of license plate recognition systems. The conversation centered around the capabilities of Flock Safety, a company providing automated license plate readers, and the implications of their data handling practices.

Commissioner DeWitt expressed concerns about the concept of anonymized data, questioning how it can be truly anonymous when it is linked to identifiable vehicles. He argued that if an outside entity can deduce the identity of a vehicle owner from the data, it contradicts the notion of anonymization. “Anonymization means you cannot find any information in a picture,” he stated, emphasizing that the current system could still allow for identification based on the captured images.

In response, representatives from Flock Safety assured that their technology captures only objective data—images of vehicles without any personally identifiable information. They explained that law enforcement agencies must independently verify vehicle ownership through separate systems, thus maintaining a layer of separation between the data collected and individual identities.

However, the discussion took a more serious turn as concerns were raised about potential misuse of the data. The mention of organizations like Palantir, which is known for building extensive databases, sparked fears about national security implications and the possibility of local municipalities violating privacy laws. The representatives insisted that Flock Safety complies with all relevant laws and has implemented safeguards to prevent unauthorized searches, particularly in states like Illinois and California where legal restrictions are in place.

The meeting highlighted the ongoing tension between technological advancement and privacy rights, with officials acknowledging the need for continuous evaluation and improvement of these systems. As the city navigates this new frontier of surveillance technology, the implications for residents' privacy remain a pressing concern. The conversation is far from over, and the community will be watching closely as these discussions evolve.