Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheriff urges board to consider Flock license-plate camera network; presentation prompts questions on cost, privacy and DOT permits
Summary
Sheriff Aaron Hellenburg and detectives briefed commissioners on a proposal to install eight Flock license-plate reader cameras (six fixed, two portable) to aid missing-persons, stolen-vehicle and narcotics investigations; commissioners asked for the item to be considered during budget planning and asked for more legal and permitting details.
Sheriff Aaron Hellenburg and investigators presented a proposal to the Board to deploy eight license-plate-reader cameras from vendor Flock Safety, including six stationary units and two portable units.
Sgt. Detective Brian Bailey described the investigative uses for a distributed LPR (license-plate recognition) network, saying it can help track stolen vehicles, identify suspect travel patterns in narcotics and locate missing people by matching plate sightings across an aggregated network. "If you don't get eight, if you get 2, you can only view the cameras that are deployed in Rutherford County. If you get the 8, you have access to the nationwide database," Bailey said, explaining that a certain deployment threshold unlocks broader shared-database access.
Taylor Elton and Jonathan (Flock representatives) answered questions about privacy, data retention and technical requirements. Flock representatives said data are encrypted, retained on a rolling 30-day schedule unless pulled into an active investigation, and that system searches require documented reason/case number and leave audit trails. The vendor noted most installations use LTE connections and that some DOT right-of-way permits may be required; state pilot programs and SBI facilitation for DOT encroachment permits were also discussed.
Commissioners asked for more information before committing funds: whether county-owned cameras could be integrated, the potential bandwidth and IT involvement, and how right-of-way permitting with NCDOT would be handled. Several commissioners suggested the item be considered through the regular budget process and legal review; the sheriff was told the master services agreement could be vetted by county counsel.
No formal vote occurred; commissioners directed staff to evaluate costs, permitting and legal issues during upcoming budget discussions.
