Buckeye police defend license-plate reader program, stress privacy safeguards
Loading...
Summary
Chief Bob Zanage and Deputy Chief Chuck Dezado told council the department uses license-plate readers, traffic cameras, body cameras and drones to support investigations, emphasized a 30-day retention policy for routine footage, said data is shared only with law enforcement and stated there is no facial-recognition use.
At the Feb. 17, 2026 City of Buckeye council workshop, Police Chief Bob Zanage and Deputy Chief Chuck Dezado presented the department's approach to public-safety technology, arguing the tools aid investigations while contending safeguards protect privacy.
Zanage described early LPR deployment and the rationale: "it's a picket fence around the city to control or know who's coming into our city as far as criminals," he said, relating the cameras' role in reducing late-night auto burglaries five years ago. He said Buckeye deployed roughly 35 license-plate reader cameras initially and now uses traffic cameras, city cameras, body-worn cameras and a drone first-responder program.
Privacy and controls: Chief Zanage said the LPRs capture license plates and vehicle characteristics only and that the system has "0 facial recognition" and "we do not sell the data." He described technical pixelation to avoid viewing private backyards and said the department programs cameras to avoid private spaces. He told council the department retains routine video and license-plate reads for 30 days; when material is pulled for a criminal-justice case it is attached to the records-management system and retained pursuant to state law.
On access and audits, staff said searches are role-based and logged, dual-authentication and encryption protect stored data, internal and external audits are used (including oversight from the Arizona Department of Public Safety) and sharing is restricted to criminal-justice agencies. Zanage said some searches come from task forces (for example, U.S. Marshals) and the department logs who accesses the system.
Council questioned whether pixelation is performed in real time or applied after recording and whether filters could be removed. Zanage said pixelation is programmed with the city's IT department and that, from the department's access perspective, filters cannot be removed; he added he could not guarantee 100% that the underlying vendor software could not operate differently elsewhere. Council also asked how widely alerts propagate; staff said hits can be nationwide if entered into NCIC and that delayed hits allow searches across jurisdictions.
Zanage pointed to success stories, including locating a missing 73-year-old after entering her plate as part of a missing-person alert, and other cases where LPRs aided investigations. He said the department posts a transparency portal for counts of cameras and searches associated with the vendor platform used.
The council thanked staff for the briefing; no policy change or formal vote was taken at the workshop.
