Four Milwaukee aldermen are expressing concern about “the lack of adequate guardrails, auditing, supervision, and transparency” surrounding the use of Flock Safety license plate reader cameras. In a three-page letter sent Wednesday to the city’s Fire and Police Commission (FPC), Common Council President José Pérez and Alders Marina Dimitrijevic, Alex Brower and Sharlen Moore said that recent cases like one involving a Milwaukee police officer who used Flock to stalk a romantic partner “are alarming and underscore the systemic oversight gap rather than an isolated failure.” 

The letter is the latest ripple in a wave of community pushback against the use of Flock Safety cameras, which are equipped with license plate reading technology and can be accessed by law enforcement agencies across the country using search terms and filters. Critics also express concern that the cameras can be used for backdoor surveillance by the federal government, particularly as the Trump administration pursues an aggressive immigration crackdown. 

Audit data reviewed by Wisconsin Examiner shows that officers often use vague terms like “investigation,” “suspicious,” “cooch,” or just “.” to search the network. Some Wisconsin communities have canceled their contracts with the multi-billion dollar Flock Safety company due to concerns about its technology.

 

 

Just a day before the Milwaukee council members sent their letter to the FPC, TMJ4 reported that the Milwaukee Police Department cut off access to its license plate reader database. The police department said officers have been blocked from using the system while the department re-evaluates who needs access to the technology. Currently, TMJ4 reported, only officers in “sensitive portions” of MPD’s Criminal Investigations Bureau can access Flock for emergency cases. The department, headed by Chief Jeffrey Norman, has also banned facial recognition technology after months of community pushback.

In their letter, the four Milwaukee alders warned that a system like Flock — capable of “tracking movement patterns, identifying vehicles, and storing sensitive location data” — can be “weaponized against residents, including survivors of domestic violence, journalists, advocates, and everyday community members.” 

The alders were especially alarmed about a recent case involving Josue Ayala, a Milwaukee police officer facing one misdemeanor count of misconduct in public office for allegedly using Flock to track two people, one of whom was Ayala’s a romantic partner, 179 times. When he used Flock, Ayala entered the search term “investigation,” the most common search used by Wisconsin law enforcement agencies during the first half of 2025, according to the Examiner’s analysis of audit data.

In their letter, Milwaukee council members ask the FPC what specific training officers must receive to access Flock; how use is supervised real time, who’s responsible for reviewing searches, how frequently audits are conducted, and what “independent body oversees compliance and investigates misuse?” The alders are demanding that the city support reforms including: 

• Independent auditing of Flock cameras and other license plate reading technology;
• Limiting the purpose for using these technologies to “documented casework,” 
• Establishing a system of real-time flagging and increasing approval to use the system by supervisors,
• What the letter calls “a clear firewall for immigration enforcement,” preventing the police department’s Flock network from being used by federal agencies in ways that go against the department’s own policies restricting cooperation with immigration enforcement, 
• Transparent reporting including query volume trends, high-level categories of uses, who the data is shared with, and discipline/misuse outcomes, 
• Oversight hearings built into normal governance routines, such as the council’s Public Safety and Health Committee, which the letter notes “is a natural forum for recurring surveillance oversight hearings and for receiving transparency reports,” 
• Treating surveillance technology contracts as public interest infrastructure agreements “requiring clarity on retention and disclosure, clear rules on secondary use, and enforceable audit access for the city and designated independent reviewers,”
• And reforms to local legislation such as adopting a Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS) policy, which local activists and community members have been calling for in recent years. 

Just a day after the alders issued their letter, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wisconsin also sent its own communication to the Public Safety and Health Committee regarding Flock and other police surveillance technology. 

“It is critical that our community has a say in if and how invasive surveillance technologies are used, how they are deployed against residents, if and how their data is stored and shared with third parties, and whether spending our limited tax dollars on surveillance technologies is the best way to promote public safety,” the ACLU letter stated.

Abuse of surveillance tech cases across Wisconsin

The ACLU’s letter also noted “a disturbing trend in Wisconsin and across the country regarding law enforcement abuse of Flock [Automatic License Plate Reader] technology to stalk and harass people, in most cases women.” 

If convicted, Ayala could face up to nine months in prison and up to $10,000 in fines. However, a criminal complaint issued for Ayala mentions that negotiations have been underway for a settlement that would include his resignation. 

Departments are also inconsistent in how they respond to the use of vague or overly common search terms. After the Examiner approached the Waukesha Police Department about why hundreds of Flock searches had been labeled with only “.” in the field indicating the reason for the search, a spokesperson said that a single officer was responsible for the searches and had been counseled and retrained. By contrast the West Allis Police Department — the state’s most frequent user of the “.” Flock search term during the first half of 2025 — only asserted that its officers are properly trained, and that it investigates misuse cases “when warranted.” 

In addition to Ayala, another officer accused of misusing surveillance technology is Jay Johnson, the chief of the Greenfield Police Department. Johnson is facing felony misconduct in public office charges for installing a department-owned pole camera on his property during a messy divorce. Johnson is also accused of destroying data by deleting text messages after a meeting where he learned about the accusations and was offered a chance to retire. 

In Menasha, Wisconsin, Cristian Morales is facing felony misconduct in public office charges for allegedly using Flock to track someone while he was off duty. If convicted, the Menasha Police Department officer could be imprisoned for up to three and a half years and be fined up to $10,000. As with Ayala, Morales’ alleged misuse of Flock was discovered only after a complaint was made to another police department, and not through oversight by Menasha, Auto Wire reported. 

A new case of Flock abuse in Kenosha

In Kenosha County, a sheriff’s deputy was reportedly offered a severance package to resign, and has yet to face charges for inappropriate use of surveillance technology. 

Internal investigation documents obtained by the Examiner through an open records request show that, in late September, Frank McGrath, at that time a Kenosha County Sheriff Department deputy, logged into an app on his phone to access his agency’s Flock network. McGrath wanted to search for a specific vehicle, entering “suspicious” as the reason for using the AI-powered cameras. But McGrath was off duty, and his searches — lacking any case numbers — weren’t intended to find a murder suspect, stolen car, or kidnapped child. Instead, McGrath was apparently stalking another Kenosha County deputy whom he was dating. 

McGrath’s 16 Flock searches were first noticed by Kenosha County Sheriff Capt. Erik Klinkhammer, during an audit in October 2025. After checking the license plate which McGrath repeatedly searched in the TIME system — a consolidated information database used by law enforcement — Klinkhammer confirmed that the targeted vehicle belonged to a Kenosha County Sheriff’s deputy, whose name is redacted in the documents obtained by the Examiner through records requests. 

“There was no indication that [REDACTED] or her vehicle were connected to any investigation, and informal internal speculation suggested a possible romantic relationship between McGrath and [REDACTED],” the internal investigation report states. “These factors raised concerns regarding McGrath’s motive for conducting off-duty searches of her vehicle.” 

None of McGrath’s other Flock searches were like those that raised Klinkhammer’s suspicions. McGrath was placed on administrative leave and ordered to report to the sheriff’s office for questioning. The vice president of the Kenosha Sheriff Offices union was also notified of the situation.

McGrath initially denied having misused Flock stating that, “he performed the searches through the FLOCK app on his phone and dismissed the relevance of questions about a relationship with [REDACTED],” the investigation report states. McGrath surrendered his badge and firearm before leaving the room. “Within moments,” the reports continued, McGrath returned with the union vice president saying he didn’t want to leave the situation unresolved, and admitting that he was having romantic relationship problems with the deputy whose license he searched in Flock. Klinkhammer then called the deputy in question, who confirmed that she already knew about McGrath monitoring her vehicle through Flock. “[REDACTED] said she was not afraid of McGrath and is not in fear of her safety,” the investigation report states. 

In a separate interview, the deputy McGrath was monitoring also appeared with a union representative. She said that McGrath had told her about the Flock searches a week or two before Klinkhammer contacted her. “[REDACTED] stated she did believe his actions were in violation of policy and found it ‘weird,’ but she did not report the information to a supervisor,” the investigation report states. She elaborated on a close friendship she had with another male coworker who, after learning about her relationship with McGrath, had been giving her the “cold shoulder.” 

“She was extremely upset by this change, and while speaking with McGrath on the day of the FLOCK searches, she became emotional and cried,” the investigation report states. “She explained that she and this coworker communicated daily, both on and off duty, and the sudden distance was upsetting. She stated that McGrath told her her reaction was not normal and questioned whether she had romantic feelings for the coworker. [REDACTED] told him she did not, explaining she was simply hurt by the loss of the friendship.”

Later, McGrath questioned her about who had access to her vehicle. “Because she lives with her parents, she explained that either her mother or father can take her car at any time,” the investigation report states. “She noted it was unusual that McGrath repeatedly asked this question.” The two eventually had “a significant argument related to her having male friends,” which led to her distancing herself from her male friends, after which things with McGrath improved, according to the report. 

Surveillance motivated by jealousy

“[REDACTED] denied any physical altercations, domestic violence, or concerning behavior of that nature during the relationship,” the investigation report states. “She stated McGrath did not like her having male friends, wanted to go through her phone at times, and had expressed jealousy issues, but she denied any physical incidents. She also denied believing she was being stalked, stating that she and McGrath shared their iPhone locations with each other.”

The two talked about the situation again after McGrath was placed on leave, devolving into another argument. “[REDACTED] stated McGrath never asked her to lie for him and instructed her to tell the truth,” the investigation report states. “She confirmed they are still currently in a relationship, though McGrath has made only limited comments about discussing the situation with his union representative.” The investigation report notes that, “when asked why she did not initially report McGrath’s FLOCK use after he told her, [REDACTED] said she did not know what to do and felt the situation was strange.”

When he spoke with investigators, McGrath said he’d undergone Flock training and understood police databases can only be used for “legitimate investigative purposes,” and agreed that his own use was “unauthorized.” However, McGrath told investigators that his understanding of Flock and license plate reader policies “was vague” and he said that “although he signs off on policy updates, he often does not read them.”

McGrath said that his own insecurity and the way the female deputy reacted to her friend cutting her off contributed to his misuse of Flock. “He explained that he first ran a partial plate using the digits he knew, then used an Antioch, Illinois, camera hit from a prior visit to his residence to identify her full plate number,” the investigation reads. “He then continued searching her movements through the system. His stated goal was to determine whether [REDACTED] was at home or possibly visiting the male coworker he was suspicious of.” 

McGrath said he “knew [he] probably shouldn’t have” used Flock for personal reasons “but believed FLOCK was not as tightly regulated as TIME.” He also said that he didn’t use other police databases such as LEADS or New Work for personal reasons “and could not explain why he treated FLOCK differently.” McGrath also admitted to initially lying to Capt. Klinkhammer “claiming he was embarrassed and ashamed,” the investigation report notes. 

Besides Flock, McGrath also used a squad car tracking system called Polaris to monitor his partner. “He admitted these searches were motivated by jealousy, stating he checked to see where she was, who she might be sitting near, or which deputies she was working alongside,” the report states. “He agreed this behavior was inappropriate and understood how it could be viewed as stalking-type conduct.” McGrath entered the reason for the searches as “suspicious” as “likely an attempt to legitimize the searches, and stated that although he knew in the back of his mind that what he was doing was wrong, he was not in the right frame of mind at the time.”

‘Knowingly and repeatedly’ misusing Flock

The internal investigation found that McGrath “knowingly and repeatedly” misused Flock and Polaris, and was not truthful when confronted by a supervisor about his actions. “His actions constitute an abuse of his authority and a serious breach of trust regarding confidential law enforcement information,” the investigation report states. “His pattern of personal surveillance using restricted law enforcement systems, coupled with his initial dishonesty, represents serious misconduct. The misuse was repeated, knowing, and extended over multiple months. It occurred off duty, and it was directed at a fellow member of this agency in the context of a romantic relationship.” 

Kenosha County Sheriff Lt. Chase Forster concluded in the investigation that “this level of misconduct significantly undermines the integrity and credibility expected of a Kenosha County Sheriff’s Deputy, and formal discipline is warranted.” Yet that discipline never came. 

According to a John Doe petition filed by Kevin Mathewson, a controversial local figure who runs the Kenosha County Eye, McGrath resigned and avoided having his case referred to the district attorney’s office. Mathewson also wrote on Kenosha County Eye that McGrath received a severance agreement when he resigned. Mathewson points out in his John Doe petition that other Wisconsin officers — including in Milwaukee, Menasha and Greenfield — have faced misconduct in public office charges for abusing Flock. By filing a John Doe petition, Mathewson is asking a judge to consider whether probable cause exists to charge McGrath. If a judge decides that probable cause exists, he or she may appoint special prosecutors to explore options to convict.

The Examiner reached out to the Kenosha County Sheriff’s Office for comment. Acting as a spokesperson, Forster declined to comment, saying that the criminal investigation is being carried out by the neighboring Racine County Sheriff’s Office. While a spokesperson from Racine County confirmed that the department is  “working on it,” referring to the investigation against McGrath, they declined to comment further, stating that Kenosha is in charge of releasing information and statements. The Racine County Sheriff spokesperson assured the Examiner that they weren’t “trying to play ‘hide the ball.’”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Milwaukee Ald. Alex Brower was aware of fears in his community about immigration enforcement. Like many Wisconsinites, Brower had watched as Operation: Metro Surge in Minnesota led to thousands of arrests, community resistance, and the killings of Renee Good, and Alex Pretti by federal agents and the nonfatal shooting of Julio Sosa Colis. Hundreds of residents packed a town hall Brower held in early February. “People are ready to be engaged,” Brower told the Wisconsin Examiner. “People are just sick of what’s going on.”

On Wednesday, elected officials will host a bilingual ICE awareness community discussion on Milwaukee’s South Side. Earlier this month, Brower and other Milwaukee alders announced a package of local ordinances that aim to prepare Milwaukee for a surge in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations.  

The package would require all ICE agents to be unmasked when interacting with the public in Milwaukee, and prohibit agents from staging raids on county property such as libraries and parks. Ald. JoCasta Zamarripa said that the local push is “an effort to deescalate fear, tensions and confusion,” WUWM reported. Ald. Marina Dimitrijevic said at the alders’ Feb. 11 news conference, “I stand here today to talk about something we can say yes to…You heard a lot of what we’re willing to say no to. We’re going to set the standards high in the city of Milwaukee, the largest city in the state of Wisconsin, that is built on our diversity. It is our strength.” 

Common Council President Ald. Jose Perez joined Zamarripa, Brower, Dimitrijevic, and community members in announcing the package. The proposals will need to be approved by the council, and then head to Mayor Cavalier Johnson’s desk. The Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America have also been circulating a letter writing campaign to compel the common council to sign the ICE Out package. Over 1,800 letters have been sent so far, with the group’s goal being a total of 3,200 letters.

People in Milwaukee want to see their local government try to do something to protect against abuses by the federal government, even city ordinances could be struck down in court, Brower said. When he asked residents who attended his town hall if they would want local officials to at least try to do something, he told the Examiner, the crowd unanimously yelled “yes!”

“So many people are ready, themselves individually, to take action,” he said, ”either by supporting a mutual aid effort, getting trained to be an ICE verifier, or participating in any sort of picketing or protesting that happens at the site of an ICE abduction. So that’s No. 1 – I heard that almost universally. And then the second thing that I heard was that people want the City of Milwaukee to do everything it can to fight ICE.”

A question for local law enforcement 

As a matter of policy, the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) does not engage in immigration enforcement. MPD’s policy states that “proactive immigration enforcement by local police can be detrimental to our mission and policing philosophy when doing so deters some individuals from participating in their civic obligation to assist the police.” 

The Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office — which oversees the county jail — does not hold people in custody for ICE. Prior to the arrest and conviction of former Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan, local judges had been debating the creation of a draft policy after several immigration arrests by plain-clothes federal agents at the county courthouse.

Limiting cooperation with ICE is a philosophy shared by some police departments across the country, but not all. Under the second administration of President Donald Trump, more sheriffs and police departments have joined the federal 287(g) program, which deputizes local law enforcement to conduct immigration enforcement. The counties of Waukesha and Washington, which border Milwaukee County to the west and north, both have 287(g) agreements.

For counties that do not want to collaborate with ICE, it’s not clear what can be done to avoid the warrantless searches, mass arrests, and use of force Chicago and Minneapolis have experienced. When asked how police would respond to a Minneapolis or Chicago-style immigration surge, the Milwaukee Police Department said it would rely on its existing policies. Beyond that, however, the department said “we do not have an operation like Chicago therefore cannot provide information about a policy of something that we do not have in our city.”

Brower said that answers provided by MPD officials who attended his town hall did not satisfy community members. “I chimed in as well, sharing with the police department, and with those present, that I believe that MPD should commit to the very least investigating, if not arresting, individuals who break the law,” even if they’re federal agents. 

Back in 2020, when masked and militarized federal agents cracked down on Black Lives Matter protesters in Portland and other cities, then-Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm responded to videos showing people being beaten, sprayed, gassed and arrested by agents who also loaded detainees into unmarked vehicles, saying, “Kidnapping, false imprisonment, unlawful assault, those are crimes.” 

“Those are crimes no matter who commits them,” Chisholm said in 2020, “whether you’re a federal agent or a citizen. You can’t do that, not in the United States, and it won’t be tolerated here.” 

Would a shooting investigation be independent in Wisconsin?

After federal agents killed Good and Pretti within three weeks of each other, local and state officials in Minnesota called for independent investigations. Yet the federal government refused, and even blocked Minnesota state law enforcement investigators from accessing the scenes of the two killings. That lack of cooperation from the federal government continues today, as the FBI refuses to provide access to evidence from the Pretti shooting to Minnesota’s state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA). 

In a statement reported by the Minnesota Reformer, the state agency’s superintendent Drew Evans said that “while this lack of cooperation is concerning and unprecedented, the BCA is committed to thorough, independent and transparent investigations of these incidents, even if hampered by a lack of access to key information and evidence.” Recently, ICE was also admitted that two of its agents are currently being investigated after giving false statements under oath about the non-fatal shooting of Sosa-Celis. Sosa-Celis originally faced felony charges for assaulting an officer, but those charges have now been dropped. 

Wisconsin state law prevents police from leading investigations into fatal shootings of civilians by members of their own agencies. Passed a decade after the Kenosha Police Department quickly cleared a killing by one of its officers, the Michael Bell law has required that such investigations be led by an agency uninvolved in the death. Local prosecutors then decide whether officers will be charged or cleared. 

Which agency leads the investigation depends on where you are. While the state Department of Justice (DOJ) leads many officer-involved shooting investigations across Wisconsin, sometimes local police departments and sheriffs need to step in. Since 2015, a component of the Wisconsin DOJ known as the Division of Criminal Investigation has investigated 136 killings of civilians by police from Racine to Blue Mounds, New Berlin to Pine River. 

In Milwaukee, however, those sorts of investigations are led by a group of nearly two dozen law enforcement agencies from Milwaukee County, Waukesha and Brookfield, known as the Milwaukee Area Investigative Team (MAIT). The team, which has existed for over a decade, rotates responsibility for investigating officer-involved deaths between its various member agencies. MAIT’s practices, however, have been criticized for being too lenient to officers who kill civilians. 

The Examiner asked both MAIT and the Wisconsin DOJ how an investigation into a shooting by a federal agent would be handled, especially considering that DHS had prevented local agencies from accessing evidence. A DOJ spokesperson said in an emailed statement that “investigations of officer-involved critical incidents should be conducted fully, transparently, and impartially by an independent agency.” The statement added that the state DOJ’s Department of Criminal Investigation “regularly serves in this independent investigatory role and is prepared to investigate if necessary.”

But MAIT will only investigate incidents involving its own members, the team’s appointed commander, Wauwatosa Police Department Lt. Joseph Roy, wrote in an emailed statement to the Examiner. “MAIT is not a department, entity, or unit,” Roy said. Instead, he described MAIT as “a cooperative effort” which has not partnered with any federal agency to date. “Per our bylaws, MAIT is restricted to investigating officer-involved shootings from agencies in the cooperative. While we share a close partnership with our local federal entities, MAIT would not investigate those incidents. That responsibility would lie with the jurisdiction in which the shooting occurred, in coordination with the involved agency.”

If federal immigration agents killed someone within the jurisdiction of a MAIT member agency, such as Milwaukee or Wauwatosa, then that local agency would need to rely on its own resources to investigate, and coordinate with the federal agency responsible for the shooting. 

Although shootings by federal agents are rare in Milwaukee, they’re not unheard of. In 2017, task force officers from the city police departments of West Allis and Milwaukee were working alongside Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents to track down 32-year-old Jermaine Claybrooks as part of a drug investigation. WISN reported that Claybrooks sped away in his vehicle upon realizing that unmarked vehicles were attempting to block him in, crashing into a nearby tree. Officers said that Claybrooks appeared to be armed as they broke out his windows, and fired when they said he pointed a gun. 

Although local media and prosecutors focused on the DEA’s involvement, a DHS agent’s firearm was also inspected by investigators. More recently, DEA agents have supported arrest teams for immigration operations, including the team former Judge Dugan confronted outside her courtroom last year. 

The Claybrooks investigation was handled by an early version of MAIT called the Milwaukee County Suburban Investigations Team, with the Wauwatosa Police Department serving as the lead agency. Later that year, prosecutors decided against charging the officers who shot Claybrooks. Although this earlier iteration of MAIT did investigate a shooting involving federal agents, the team in its current form would not step in. 

Brower said that at the very least, he’d expect MPD to “at least attempt” to conduct a serious investigation. During his town hall, Brower said that law enforcement officials expressed doubts that prosecutors would be able to secure a conviction against federal agents who kill local residents during immigration operations. “OK, that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t try,” he said. 

A community preparing itself

On Wednesday, local elected officials will host a bilingual ICE awareness community discussion at the Sister Joel Read Conference Center on the campus of Alverno College. Dubbed the “Safety in Numbers: Protecting Our Historically Immigrant South Side” meeting, the discussion will provide residents another opportunity to share their concerns about immigration enforcement, and prepare for a surge in Milwaukee.

“As an immigrant-rich community, the South Side deserves clear, accurate information and reassurance that our local institutions are focused on safety, dignity, and the rule of law,” said Ald. Peter Burgelis. “This meeting is about empowering residents with knowledge, connecting them to trusted resources, and making sure people know they are not alone.” 

County Supervisor Sky Capriolo said in a statement that “community safety starts with transparency and trust.” Capriolo said that “by bringing people together and sharing accurate information, we can reduce fear, combat misinformation, and strengthen our neighborhoods.” MPD Chief Jeffrey Norman, Milwaukee County Sheriff Danita Ball, and representatives from Voces de la Frontera and the Milwaukee Turners will also attend the Wednesday community meeting. 

Tamping down on misinformation has been a growing concern in Milwaukee, with unverified rumors of ICE agents roaming the city having floated around since January. The city and county governments in Milwaukee have also created Know Your Rights resource webpages. 

“Our South Side is strong because of its diversity and deep sense of community,” Zamparripa said in a statement ahead of the Wednesday meeting. “This conversation is about standing together, ensuring residents know their rights, and reinforcing that Milwaukee is a city that values all of its people.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE