Amber Duke, executive director of the ACLU of Kentucky, questioned the risks of misuse and misidentification, the company’s commercial interests and the privacy implications of collecting vehicle data. She said some Kentucky cities, including Frankfort, have opted not to renew their contracts while seeking clearer transparency and safeguards.

Louisville Councilwoman Ginny Mulvey Woolridge, who has a technology background, defended the cameras as a tool for solving crimes. She pointed to the system’s role in apprehending the man accused of killing Kentucky State Police Trooper Hayden Phillips and cited Louisville Metro Police Department figures showing vehicle thefts down 11%, theft-arrest clearance rates up 15.9% and monthly vehicle recoveries roughly doubled.

Duke countered that less than 1% of collected data is connected to a crime or wrongdoing. Woolridge acknowledged that figure could be accurate but said she would not want to be among those affected by the remaining data use.

The panelists agreed that residents have concerns and that law enforcement users could abuse the technology. Woolridge said she favors technology vetted by the government’s information technology department with safeguards in place. Duke called for a pause to allow officials and the public to better understand the technology and its development.

A Kentucky law regulating the use of Flock data took effect this year. Panelists said the issue is likely to return during the next legislative session, leaving Louisville residents and lawmakers to weigh the cameras’ investigative value against the need for transparent limits on surveillance.