The University of Minnesota Police Department says it will remove a newly installed automated license plate reader near the university’s West Bank campus following concerns raised by residents and elected officials in Minneapolis’ Cedar-Riverside neighborhood.

The surveillance camera, operated using technology from Flock Safety, was installed near the intersection of Cedar and Riverside avenues, an area that serves as a major gateway to the University of Minnesota’s West Bank campus and the surrounding Cedar-Riverside community.

The installation quickly drew concerns from some neighborhood residents over privacy, surveillance and how information collected by the camera could potentially be shared with other law enforcement agencies.

Minneapolis City Council Member Jamal Osman and Minnesota State Rep. Mohamud Noor, DFL-Minneapolis, said they contacted university officials about removing the device after hearing concerns from members of the community.

The University of Minnesota Police Department ultimately agreed to remove the camera.

In a statement, UMPD said the decision was made “to support community trust while maintaining robust safety coverage.”

Our decisions are always guided by the best interests of our community and the University, and UMPD is committed to engaging and collaborating with stakeholders on any future security technology installations,” the department said.

Camera is one of 10 operated by UMPD

The camera scheduled to be removed is an automated license plate reader, commonly referred to as an ALPR.

According to data from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, UMPD operates 10 automated license plate readers.

Unlike a traditional surveillance camera primarily intended to record video of an area, automated license plate readers are designed to capture and process information about vehicles passing within their field of view.

Flock Safety's ALPR technology can collect information including a vehicle's license plate number, make and model, along with identifying characteristics such as stickers or other visible markings.

That information can then be searched by law enforcement during investigations.

Police departments across the country have increasingly turned to automated license plate readers as a tool for identifying vehicles associated with criminal investigations, locating stolen vehicles and helping find missing or endangered people.

UMPD says its Flock cameras have assisted officers with criminal investigations and have helped locate stolen vehicles and missing persons.

However, the growing use of the technology has also generated significant debate over privacy and government surveillance.

Privacy and data-sharing concerns

Critics of automated license plate readers have raised questions about how much information the systems collect, how long that information is retained and which agencies are allowed to search it.

Because ALPR systems can document vehicles traveling through a particular location, privacy advocates have also raised concerns about what could potentially be learned when information from numerous cameras is combined.

Those concerns have become particularly significant as networks of license plate readers have expanded across cities and states.

Questions surrounding data sharing have contributed to public backlash against Flock technology in several Minnesota communities, with a growing number of cities and counties choosing to end their contracts with the company.

The Cedar-Riverside controversy also comes amid questions about transparency surrounding the locations of automated license plate readers.

According to BCA data, UMPD is one of four Minnesota law enforcement agencies that does not publicly disclose the locations of its ALPR devices.

The other agencies are the Crow Wing County Sheriff's Office, Edina Police Department and Robbinsdale Police Department.

UMPD outlines restrictions on collected data

UMPD says safeguards are in place governing how information collected by its license plate readers can be stored and shared.

According to the department, data collected through its Flock system is automatically purged after 30 days.

UMPD also says routine access to its data is limited to other law enforcement agencies within Minnesota.

Requests from agencies outside Minnesota are handled differently. According to UMPD, an out-of-state agency seeking access must receive approval on a case-by-case basis rather than receiving automatic access to the university's data.

The department also says information collected by its cameras cannot be used for immigration-related searches.

Additionally, law enforcement agencies participating in 287(g) agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are prohibited from accessing UMPD's Flock data.

The federal 287(g) program allows ICE to enter into agreements with state and local law enforcement agencies under which designated officers can perform certain immigration enforcement functions.

Those restrictions are particularly relevant in Cedar-Riverside, a diverse Minneapolis neighborhood that is home to a large immigrant and East African community.

Community trust at center of decision

The university's decision to remove the Cedar and Riverside camera highlights the challenge law enforcement agencies face as they adopt increasingly sophisticated surveillance technology.

Police agencies argue that automated license plate readers can provide investigators with valuable information quickly, particularly when officers are searching for a stolen vehicle, attempting to identify a suspect vehicle or trying to locate a missing person.

At the same time, community members and privacy advocates have increasingly called for greater transparency about where the cameras are located, what information they collect and who can access the resulting databases.

The debate can become especially significant when cameras are installed in neighborhoods without residents knowing about the technology beforehand.

In Cedar-Riverside, concerns from residents ultimately reached elected officials, prompting Osman and Noor to contact the university.

UMPD's decision to remove the camera represents a response to those concerns while the department continues operating other automated license plate readers elsewhere.

The department's statement also indicates that community engagement could play a larger role before similar technology is installed in the future.

UMPD said it remains committed to working with stakeholders on future security technology installations, suggesting the department could seek additional community input when considering where and how surveillance equipment is deployed.

The removal does not mean the University of Minnesota is abandoning automated license plate reader technology altogether. The department continues to view ALPRs as a public safety tool and says the cameras have produced useful results in investigations.

Instead, the decision centers specifically on the device near Cedar and Riverside avenues and the concerns raised by people living around the West Bank campus.

The controversy reflects a broader debate taking place across Minnesota over how communities should balance new law enforcement technology with privacy, transparency and public trust.

As more agencies adopt systems capable of automatically collecting and searching vehicle information, questions about oversight and data sharing are likely to remain part of that debate.

For Cedar-Riverside residents, however, the immediate result is clear: UMPD says the Flock camera that prompted the community's concerns will be coming down.