MARIES COUNTY — Flock cameras may be installed in Maries County this year to better keep the community safe, according to Sheriff Mark Morgan.

The Maries County Sheriff’s Office used its Blue Shield Grant to purchase two Flock cameras in 2025 and plans to install them on Highway 28 near Belle and Highway 63 near Vichy. While people nationwide have privacy concerns, Morgan said that there are safeguards in place to prevent abuse.

Gov. Mike Kehoe on Sept. 16 also signed Executive Order 26-18, limiting Flock camera usage within Missouri. Data must be deleted within 30 days unless there is an ongoing criminal investigation, and it must be used only for criminal justice and saving lives.

Law enforcement agencies that receive state funding must also log records requests, the case number or reason, and requesting officer. Officers who misuse the data can be disciplined and lose their officer licenses.

Third parties are also prohibited from accessing the data, and no entity can enable artificial intelligence for facial recognition.

According to Flock’s website, the license plate reader cameras do not take videos, only still photos of a vehicle and identify the plate number, make and model. The cameras also do not track speeds or issue speeding tickets.

Morgan said that the cameras will be used to create leads on criminal investigations, such as kidnappings or stolen vehicles. He said that he has had to investigate crimes in which the victim only knows that his property was stolen or that it was a white passenger vehicle headed south. Sometimes the victim doesn’t even know the make and model.

But by using that limited information, an officer could look up the data from the camera to further the investigation.

“It’s a uphill battle. So I’m trying to use available technology to try to even the playing field,” he said.

Unless requested, photos are permanently deleted after seven days by default. Afterwards, Flock, the sheriff’s office and Amazon Web Services all cannot retrieve the photos.

Morgan said that every data search will be logged and that there must be a reason for the search. Each user will have to log in to their individual account to access the database. Deputies and the dispatch center will have access to the system.

As for the Vienna and Belle police departments, Morgan said that they could access the system through contacting the sheriff’s office. Since Vienna Police Chief Shannon Thompson is a reserve deputy, he might also receive login credentials to the system.

Morgan is also willing to share the data with any reciprocal agencies.

During the Sept. 10 Maries County commission meeting, Vic Stratman, presiding commissioner, texted Morgan, asking if the county had Flock cameras. Morgan responded, saying that there are no Flock cameras currently installed.

Stratman then asked if there was a plan for the cameras to be installed, but Stratman did not say if Morgan responded during the meeting.

Mike Elliott, who visited the commission meeting, expressed his privacy concern about the Flock cameras. But he also said that those who abuse the system will be caught and punished, and he understands how technological advancements help create more resources.

“We’ve all watched movies like ‘Minority Report,’ where the next thing is they’ll be coming, and they’ll be arresting us for the thought of committing a crime. I realize that’s … fictional,” he said.

County Clerk Rhonda Rodgers also recognized that the cameras can be a “wonderful thing” when used to investigate crimes and kidnappings.

“I see both sides of it,” Elliott said. “But when does my rights, when does my privacy get trumped by bad people’s choices and decisions?”

Rodney Southard, Eastern District commissioner, asked Elliott if a judge would have to order a review of the footage, but Elliott said that unlike cell phones, no judge is necessary.

While cell phones collect data, Elliott said a person chooses to purchase the device and can opt out of certain data sharing. And a judge needs access to much of that information.

Southard said that if Flock cameras are used, there needs to be control access, but he also questioned waiting for a judge to approve accessing the data while the suspect is fleeing.

For privacy concerns, Morgan said that there is no expectation of privacy on a highway right of way. He compared Flock cameras to the courthouse security cameras, recording the surrounding streets and sidewalks, where there is also no expectation of privacy.

Morgan also said that courts have ruled that these cameras do not violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

The U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Virginia ruled Jan. 27 in Schmidt v. City of Norfolk that automated license plate readers (ALPR) are not violations because there is no expectation of privacy on a public road. The court also ruled that using these cameras does not constitute a “search.”

The court also said that while these cameras can detect every vehicle that drives through that point, they do not track the starting and ending points of the journeys.

Morgan said that even if the county had 10 cameras, he wouldn’t be able to track movements. All a camera tells him is that a specific car passed a specific point at a certain time, not where it was coming from or headed to.

“To track your every movement, I would literally have to have a camera on every street corner and every half a mile of every county road,” Morgan said. “I don’t know of any jurisdiction or agency that has the budget or the funding to have that many cameras.”

As for abuse of the system, Morgan said that he would terminate the employee with no tolerance. Because being a deputy is a “position of trust,” officers should not be running criminal history on their ex-boyfriends. He also said that there should be criminal penalties for misusing the system.

To anyone who may vandalize Flock cameras in Maries County, Morgan warned that doing so is a crime. He also encouraged such people to research the issue more.

When he first heard of the technology, he was concerned, but after looking into it, he realized that they are not speeding cameras, which he opposes. Morgan also said he would be opposed if Flock cameras were pointing at a private house or backyard.

“But if it’s just on traffic, I can’t see how that’s hurting anything,” he said.