This gets us to the central problem of today’s surveillance state. No one running the cameras wants to be observed. One reason that city officials object to releasing Flock data, for example, must that they themselves are among the recorded. The cameras are on them too; they too can be tracked. Everything means everything for these everywhere cameras.
In reality it’s supposed to be even more strict. They’re trying to get around this by having a private company own the cameras. If the government owned the cameras, they would need to get a warrant with a sufficiently narrow target from a judge before initiating electronic surveillance to track the targets’ location.
If something is really going on which justifies it, getting a warrant is trivial and probable cause is a low bar.