By admin 
Irmo’s plans to expand its use of Flock Safety cameras around town is back in the news after two of the license-plate readers were vandalized last week.
Read more Driver killed in collision with truck on popular road in Columbia, SC cops say
Two of the cameras in the town northwest of Columbia were sprayed over with a foam sealant, WIS TV reported.
The cameras have since been repaired at no cost to the town, Irmo Administrator Jim Crosland told The State. The town leases the cameras from Flock Safety, a private Atlanta-based security firm that partners with both police departments and private organizations across the country.
As of Tuesday morning, no suspects had been identified in the vandalism, which left a yellowish goop hanging off the faces of the cameras in photos shared online by WIS reporter Lenah Allen.
The vandalism comes just weeks after Irmo Town Council approved a contract to triple the number of cameras the town uses. Irmo currently has 11 cameras stationed at intersections that record the license numbers and body types of passing cars. Under the latest agreement with Flock, the town would increase the number to 33, at a cost to the town of $403,050.
Flock’s cameras have become a popular tool for law enforcement agencies because it allows police to search the camera records for stolen vehicles or cars associated with suspects, which the company stores for 30 days. But as use of the cameras has expanded, they have also drawn public opposition from members of the public who worry about their movements being monitored.
Many Irmo residents spoke against the planned expansion at the July 21 meeting were the Flock contract was approved. Town Councilman Gabriel Penfield was the only council member to vote against the idea.
Read more SC Republican runoff election: Candidates, dates & Horry County polling places
Penfield told The State he would ask his colleagues to roll back that decision in light of the opposition, and the possibility the S.C. Legislature could pass legislation on police use of license-plate readers.
“Regardless of the outcome, it would be a precedent set that someone has tried to go on the record against these,” Penfield said.
Use of the cameras has become a lightning rod as they become more ubiquitous. In Albany, Georgia, this month, five police officers were fired and arrested after they allegedly accessed the town’s cameras for “non-law enforcement purposes,” according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigations. In Pageland, S.C., two camera poles carrying Flock cameras were “intentionally cut down.”
This year, the S.C. General Assembly considered a bill that would have allowed the state Department of Transportation to use the technology to read license plates on state highways, although the legislation did not advance before the end of the session in May.
But supporters of the technology say it has helped police to solve crimes and make arrests, which are the only allowable uses for an officer to search Flock’s database for a license plate. But arrests of officers for misusing Flock cameras around the country suggest at least some departments have been lax in monitoring how the cameras are being used in practice.
Read more ‘With heavy hearts’: A Mexican restaurant in northeast Columbia has closed