Las Vegas Metro defends use of donated drones, vehicles and analytics while promising transparency steps
Loading...
Summary
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department officials told legislators donated equipment has helped reduce crime but acknowledged earlier MOUs caused confusion; the department said contracts generally specify data ownership and that audits, training and a transparency portal are being expanded.
Assistant Sheriff Dori Korn of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department told the joint interim standing committee on government affairs that the department has relied on donated technology and philanthropic support to expand capabilities — including drones, specialized vehicles and automated license‑plate readers — and that donations are governed by written agreements and foundation partnerships.
Korn said donations range from small community contributions to large philanthropic projects, including a privately funded joint emergency training institute that she described as a roughly $35 million project. "Those donations very large scale in that case," Korn said, adding that donation types and documentation vary by item and that the sheriff ultimately decides whether to accept a donation.
On data and transparency: Korn acknowledged that some earlier memoranda of understanding created confusion about ownership of vendor data — a concern raised in news coverage — and said the department's current contracts state the agency owns its automated license‑plate reader (ALPR) data. "We clarify that it's our data. We own it," she said, and added the department follows CJIS and other compliance rules when vendors are involved.
Committee members pressed for specifics about donor agreements, ongoing subscription or maintenance costs, and whether donors had access to operational data. Korn replied that donation arrangements typically include documentation that can define length of service and maintenance responsibilities; many donated subscriptions cover a defined period and, if the department wants to continue a service beyond the donor period, it must budget for it later. She said donors generally do not pay for department personnel salaries.
Korn also described internal controls: supervisors conduct biannual audits of access and use for sensitive systems, training is required for everyone with access, and internal affairs handles cases of misuse; she said the agency does not routinely publish the internal audits but will investigate and report misuse when identified. The department said it is expanding public transparency — including a portal modeled on city examples — to publish ALPR use details and audit mechanisms more broadly.
Why it matters: Legislators raised concerns that some contracts with vendors could limit public disclosure or create ambiguity about who views or retains data; the committee asked the department to provide copies of vendor agreements and to clarify what parts of any MOU are confidential. Dori Korn and Washoe County representatives said donations are often facilitated through independent nonprofit foundations (for example, an Honorary Deputy Association) and that agreements typically separate donor funds from operations and data governance.
Next steps: The committee asked Metro and partner agencies to supply details on the number and types of private agreements, copies (or summaries) of contracts and MOUs, and information about auditing frequencies and public reporting of internal‑affairs outcomes. Metro said it would follow up with documentation and consider ways to close the public information loop about complaint outcomes.
