Flock Safety pitches license-plate-reader pilot to Village of East Canton; council, residents press on data policies

Michael Lucas, a regional representative for Flock Safety, told the Village of East Canton council that his company installs license-plate readers (LPRs) and related software that can help local officers by sharing ‘‘hot lists’’ and enabling searches by plate or vehicle description. Lucas said Flock works with more than 350 agencies in Ohio and suggested a pilot of about 10 cameras to cover village entrances and key locations.

Lucas emphasized agency control of data, saying, "You own the data," and that the company ‘‘does not own that’’ information; he added that Flock retains data for 30 days by default and that agencies can download and preserve records for investigations before automatic deletion. He told the council the system stores data in AWS GovCloud and that retention terms can be altered where state law requires longer periods.

Residents and council members asked detailed questions about who can request data and whether federal agencies use or request Flock records. In response, Lucas said Flock has no contracts with federal agencies and that any external requests would go through the local agency that administers the account. A member of the public asked directly about FBI access; Lucas answered that Flock ‘‘does not have contracts with any of the federal agencies’’ and that sharing follows local policy.

Lucas described technical features—real-time alerts from custom hot lists for stolen cars or missing persons, the ability to search by vehicle descriptors when plates are unavailable, and cross-jurisdictional searching if neighboring jurisdictions use the same vendor. He acknowledged privacy concerns raised by attendees and offered a no-obligation 60-day trial: Flock would deploy cameras, report results to council, and, only if the village elected to proceed, issue a 12-month contract.

Why it matters: License-plate readers can speed investigations by alerting local officers to vehicles tied to crimes, stolen-property or missing-person alerts, but they also raise privacy and public-records questions around retention, access and cross-jurisdictional data sharing. The council heard that a JAG grant application could underwrite the pilot and that deployment decisions, sharing policies and administrator roles would rest with the village police chief and council.

Council next steps: Council members discussed placement, funding and the chief’s proposal; Lucas said design and deployment could be constrained by a grant timeline and that the village could run a 60-day pilot before committing to a longer contract. The matter remained under discussion and subject to grant approval and council direction.