Arlington County has deployed more than 200 traffic cameras at major intersections, all mapped and streaming live online. I can even watch the intersection where I live — my apartment just out of frame. Alongside these livestreams are red‑light enforcement cameras and a newer set of high‑resolution Flock Safety cameras, which aren’t livestreamed. Each raises its own privacy concerns.
To address privacy concerns, the County says it does not record these feeds, limits viewing to one minute at a time, and likely uses low resolution to discourage facial recognition. Officials emphasize that the geo‑tagged live video is for traffic analysis, not crime‑fighting — yet misuse has already occurred.
In June 2024, a county employee was caught using a traffic camera to… let’s say “check out” a woman along S. Walter Reed Drive. The incident made local news and triggered an investigation. Additionally, the county’s camera website, launched in 2015 and also incorporating Virginia Department of Transportation feeds, now shuts off access during traffic crashes to curb “digital rubbernecking” (my phrasing) and other abuses that have occurred.
Arlington also operates a handful of red‑light enforcement cameras through its PhotoRED program. These take still images of vehicles running red lights, capturing license plates for automated ticketing. The system is designed specifically to promote public safety for pedestrians and drivers, with resolution high enough only for plate verification — not constant surveillance.
Separate from these systems, the Arlington County Police Department rolled out 25 high‑resolution Flock Safety cameras earlier this year. These devices use automated license plate recognition (ALPR) but also log detailed vehicle characteristics — make, model, color, and even bumper stickers — for every passing car.
The police department says searches require documented justification and are subject to regulation and auditing.
Privacy concerns over these cameras surfaced at the July 19 Arlington County Board meeting. In public comments, Susan C. highlighted the risks, especially given the potential for aggressive federal enforcement by agencies such as ICE, IRS, FBI, and ATF. She noted that all data is stored on Flock’s servers and linked with other law enforcement datasets, creating the potential for mass surveillance. “The opportunity for abuse,” she warned, “is beyond ripe — it’s rotten.”
Responding, Board Chair Takis Karantonis expressed sympathy and admitted he was not convinced the cameras could never be “abused [or] breached for means not meant for initially,” despite existing legal safeguards.
While attention is currently focused on the Flock Safety rollout, the potential misuse of live‑streamed traffic cameras shouldn’t be overlooked. Both systems highlight the growing tension between technology deployed for safety and the privacy rights of residents. As an urbanist and strong supporter of tools that can genuinely improve public safety, my concern isn’t the cameras’ existence, but the risk of data “leakage” beyond traffic analysis and automated ticketing. Ideally, every camera system — and the databases they feed — would be managed solely in-house by Arlington’s Department of Environmental Services, Transportation Division, not stored in the cloud under the control of unreliable private vendors with murky ties to federal agencies.