Arlington Heights delays vote on Flock Safety license‑plate readers after privacy, contract concerns
Loading...
Summary
Trustees postponed a decision on a proposed Flock Safety license‑plate reader contract after trustees, staff, the company and public commenters discussed transparency, auditability and penalties for improper data sharing; board asked staff to prepare amendments for a Committee of the Whole review.
Trustees agreed to postpone action on a proposed contract with Flock Safety for license‑plate reader (LPR) technology after extended discussion about privacy, data‑sharing, contract terms and audit practices.
Trustee Dunnington, who pulled the item for review, said communities elsewhere had declined to use similar systems and asked the board to make sure the contract protects residents. "We need to carefully look through this contract," she said, seeking stronger transparency and contractual penalties for unlawful data sharing.
Kristen McLeod, Flock Safety’s public affairs senior manager, described a free public transparency portal that can show how many unique vehicles pass cameras, how many searches and hot‑list alerts occurred and which external agencies have access. "The transparency portal is free for all of our law enforcement customers," McLeod said, describing searchable statistics and public‑facing information.
Trustees and members of the public raised a range of concerns: Trustee Dunnington asked for case numbers to be attached to searches and for routine audits; staff said monthly audits could be feasible. Public commenters including Rob Rodecki and Alexis McAdams urged caution and pointed to reporting about misuse of LPR data elsewhere; Rodecki suggested the village should consider terminating the relationship if data misuse could not be prevented.
Board members asked staff and counsel to draft contract language addressing transparency, audit frequency, data‑sharing penalties and other safeguards. Village staff also proposed holding a Committee of the Whole session to receive more detailed education from staff, the police department and Flock before returning the item for a vote. Flock staff said the company is "very open to discussions" and to possible contractual amendments.
The board did not vote on the item at the Dec. 15 meeting and directed staff to prepare recommended edits and to schedule further discussion.
