By Ailis Wiggett

The use of Flock cameras has been a rising issue in Louisville, both on campus and off. 

Flock Safety cameras are License Plate Recognition (LPR) cameras that capture objective vehicle data. According to Flock Safety, they capture “vehicle events, including license plates, vehicle characteristics, the time and location a vehicle passed a camera.” 

During a recent U of L Town Hall, President Gerry Bradley asked Bryan Luckett, interim chief of police, to address the use of Flock cameras on campus, including who is watching the cameras and the controversy caused by Flock cameras being used inappropriately in other places. 

President Bradley and Provost Cardarelli field audience questions at a town hall event held Aug. 26, 2026 in Chao Auditorium. (Photo by Vinny Porco / The Louisville Cardinal)

A mere 11 minutes from campus, the Shively Police Department arrested an officer, Asad Ashir, for misusing his access to Flock cameras to monitor his ex-girlfriend’s whereabouts.

If misuse of Flock cameras can happen less than five miles away from campus, who’s to say that it can’t happen here? 

Chief Luckett did not state any specific ways in which police use of Flock cameras is audited or how they ensure that abuse of technology isn’t happening. While an officer may be fired for their misuse, it’s unknown what safeguards prevent it from happening in the first place. 

People concerned about being tracked unlawfully using Flock cameras are forced to trust police officers’ word.  They’re asked to believe the claim that Flock cameras are not monitored or used without lawful reason. 

Citizens are expected to trust law enforcement; residents of Shively and other areas around the country put trust in their police department and were let down. It feels unfair to ask students and staff to trust ULPD in this way as if there isn’t rising evidence that officers misuse Flock. 

That’s not to say that U of L police aren’t worthy of trust, but they have yet to give explicit, widely communicated evidence of boundaries in place to prevent misuse.

If we are expected to trust university police, why shouldn’t they trust concerns enough to provide clear evidence that Flock misuse will not happen? A student should not need to reach out personally to find out what is in place to ensure Flock is used in the way that Luckett says. 

With many speaking out about Flock, there is hope that the city or university may listen and begin to move away from the new technology. The idea that U of L could end its agreement with Flock isn’t radical; many areas and school districts have begun to do that exact thing. 

A tracker created by an advocacy group, Deflock, cites 153 cities that have ended, rejected or deactivated their contracts with Flock. These rejections, powered by residents’ concern for privacy, prove public opinion outweighs investigative benefits. 

According to Luckett, the University of Louisville Police Department began using Flock cameras in July 2023. This means Flock cameras have been watching campus and contributing to investigations for at least three years, and likely will not be going anywhere anytime soon, regardless of privacy concerns or students speaking out. 

Luckett emphasized, “Under our agreement with Flock, U of L retains ownership of its data. Flock does not own or sell our data and may only use it to provide the services to us.”

I asked Luckett if he wanted to explain to students why Flock is worth having despite the concerns surrounding it. Luckett responded with much of what he communicated during the U of L Town Hall, with a few additional points. 

“Ultimately, I believe Flock is worth having because it gives our officers another tool to help keep our campus community safe,” he wrote. “We are not constantly monitoring people. The technology flags vehicles and plates that meet established law-enforcement criteria; our officers then determine what, if anything, that information means.” 

The U of L Athletics logo rests in the middle of a walkway near the Student Activity Center of the Belknap Campus in Louisville, Kentucky. (Photo by Vinny Porco / The Louisville Cardinal)

If ULPD wants students to trust the technology they claim is used to protect us, transparency cannot start and stop at a Town Hall. 

Although Bradley was insistent on addressing this issue during the event, a broader message has yet to come regarding concerns students have around Flock. Chief Luckett wants to clarify the boundaries in which these cameras are used to concerned students, yet there was little student turnout at the Town Hall.

Luckett is set to speak at the SGA Senate meeting on Sept. 22, which will hopefully open up conversation with students more directly. 

The issue moving forward is not simply whether Flock helps police solve crimes, but whether the university is willing to seriously engage with privacy concerns of the people being recorded. 

We aren’t just people being recorded, but people whose money runs this university. Shouldn’t we get a say in what exists on our campus? Or at least, shouldn’t our concern for a new technology that has caused issues across the country be a valid point for administrators to consider? 

And if the university and its administrators aren’t willing to prioritize student opinion, how will students know that their security and privacy come before surveillance technology?