COLUMBUS, Ohio (WOWO) — Ohio’s attorney general and the state’s largest police union are calling for new rules and penalties governing how law enforcement agencies use Flock license plate reader data, as concerns over privacy and government surveillance continue to grow.

Attorney General Andy Wilson said agencies using Flock cameras should be required to establish strict policies governing their use, conduct regular audits and face serious consequences when the technology is misused.

“We need a piece of legislation that requires each and every department or agency that uses Flock cameras to have a very strict policy on how those cameras are used,” Wilson told the Ohio Capital Journal. “We need legislation that requires agencies to conduct ongoing auditing of use to find or ferret out misuse of this resource.”

Wilson has separately called on the Ohio General Assembly to make misuse of Flock data a crime, saying the standard should be similar to existing penalties for unauthorized use of other law-enforcement databases. The attorney general’s office said unauthorized use of the Ohio Law Enforcement Gateway is currently a fifth-degree felony and can result in an officer losing their badge.

“A person who misuses this should never ever be able to wear a badge again,” Wilson said. “They violated the trust, they violated civil liberties, and they should never be put in a position of trust or responsibility with respect to public safety again.”

Wilson also said legislation should establish privacy protections for Flock data. He suggested information that is not being used as part of an active investigation be deleted within 10 to 30 days.

Flock systems use automated license plate recognition technology to capture vehicle information and help law enforcement investigate crimes. Wilson said the technology has helped Ohio agencies solve thousands of cases, including investigations involving violent crimes and missing children. At the same time, he acknowledged that some officers have misused the technology and said those instances should result in consequences.

The issue has gained additional attention following an investigation into Flock searches conducted through the system in Shaker Heights.

Public records covering December 20, 2025, through the end of April 2026 showed that Shaker Heights’ license plate reader data was accessed more than 700,000 times. Shaker Heights police accounted for 1,016 of those searches, while 693,573 searches were conducted by other law enforcement agencies in Ohio and elsewhere.

The records listed immigration as the reason for 282 searches, while ICE was mentioned 32 times, according to the Ohio Capital Journal.

State Sen. Al Cutrona, R-Canfield, is also pursuing legislation that would impose restrictions on automated license plate recognition systems.

One provision would require an outside agency seeking access to another jurisdiction’s data to obtain a warrant.

“Just like anything else, you can’t tap somebody’s phone without a warrant,” Cutrona said. “Okay, you shouldn’t be able to access at the whim of anybody’s curiosity.”

Cutrona also wants restrictions on where the cameras can be placed, including prohibiting them near places of worship and gun stores.

The Ohio Legislature is separately considering Senate Bill 469, sponsored by Cutrona, which would regulate automated license plate recognition systems, mass-surveillance technology and captured surveillance data. The bill was introduced in the Ohio Senate and remains in the legislative process.

Wilson said he does not believe additional requirements should necessarily be imposed specifically on federal agencies accessing Flock information.

He said there is a misconception that federal agencies such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement can automatically access Flock cameras in any jurisdiction.

“A lot of the public just thinks that ICE or the federal government can access these cameras in any jurisdiction, and that’s just not the way it works,” Wilson said.

Local governments retain broad authority over their own Flock policies and can place restrictions on how their data is accessed.

Ohio Fraternal Order of Police President Jay McDonald said police officials are discussing best practices and whether statewide guidance should be issued to agencies using license plate readers.

“What I believe is important is that rules get put in place, guardrails, strategies, legislation — however you want to frame it — that addresses some of the issues that are being brought forth,” McDonald said.

McDonald said existing state law already penalizes misuse of other law-enforcement databases and argued that license plate reader systems should be treated similarly.

“There should be rules around the use of them; law enforcement supports that,” McDonald said. “What we don’t support is eliminating the ability to use these tools to solve crimes, especially violent crimes.”

McDonald said police agencies can point to cases in which license plate readers helped solve serious crimes.

The debate comes as some communities around the country have moved to restrict or ban Flock systems amid concerns about privacy and Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Wilson has defended the technology while acknowledging the controversy surrounding it.

“A lot of those complaints are coming from folks who don’t fully understand how these cameras are used,” he said.

Wilson said the technology should be treated as a law-enforcement tool rather than an automatic form of surveillance.

In a September 16 statement, he said Flock systems are intended to assist criminal investigations and argued that the technology is generally being used appropriately. He also said agencies themselves have identified recent cases of misuse through internal auditing.

“Our country was founded on the idea that we value civil liberty, our individual rights over an oppressive or intrusive government,” Wilson said, acknowledging why the cameras can raise concerns. He added that Flock is a tool intended to help law enforcement protect communities.

“There may be some bad ‘apples’ misusing the data,” Wilson said. “We can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.”

Lawmakers involved in the debate hope to enact regulations by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the proposed changes would address several separate questions surrounding Flock technology: who can access the data, when a warrant should be required, how long information can be retained, where cameras can be installed and what penalties should apply when officers misuse the system.