Little Falls council agrees to test Flock Safety license-plate camera pilot

Council members in Little Falls signaled support on Jan. 20 to let the police department test a vendor-run pilot of Flock Safety automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) to assess whether stationary cameras can aid investigations in town.

Police officials, led by the Police Chief and Assistant Police Chief John Ruby, presented the technology and proposed a 60-day “project prove it” trial in which the vendor would install and operate about 10 stationary cameras at no cost to the city for the trial period. Assistant Police Chief John Ruby said the system runs continuously and can generate near-real-time alerts when a vehicle matches a ‘‘hot list’’ such as warrants, missing-persons entries or revoked drivers. "The system runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It snags license plates, and it also, will generate hits on vehicle descriptions," Ruby said, describing investigative uses including locating stolen vehicles or establishing suspect timelines.

The Police Chief described the operational details and vendor relationship: the vendor would own the equipment while the city would own the data generated; footage would be retained for 30 days unless attached to an active case. The chief said the vendor’s pilot would include installation, maintenance and cloud storage at no obligation during the 60-day evaluation, and that the city could later choose how many cameras to keep. "After that pilot... we can reevaluate and decide, do we want 10 cameras? Do we want 2 cameras?" the Police Chief said.

Officials outlined post‑pilot cost estimates and privacy safeguards. The Police Chief said an annual operating cost would be roughly $3,000 per camera to cover hardware, software, cell service and cloud storage if the city chose to continue service. On privacy, officials cited compliance with state and criminal-justice standards and described auditing measures: accesses must be tied to an active case number and are logged. "They do not take photos of people... they're doing is taking a picture of the vehicle, the license plate," the Police Chief said, and staff promised community outreach and a public transparency portal describing retention policies and statistics.

Council members questioned data ownership, county partnerships and privacy risks. Assistant Police Chief Ruby said each customer account retains its own data and that sharing with the county or other agencies would require formal agreements. One council member voiced concern about the potential for subpoenaed logs and the incremental expansion of surveillance, saying, "My knee-jerk reaction is I have some concerns... it's going to be one subpoena away from another agency on how many times a person or a vehicle has gone by this location." Police leaders replied that access requires a business reason and that the pilot will help evaluate operational value and controls.

The chief and staff said spring installation was likely (when ground conditions allow) and that signing a memorandum of understanding could let the city begin testing by accessing partner data even before local cameras are deployed. Officials also noted neighboring jurisdictions already operate Flock cameras and that the city could explore grant funding or private partnerships to reduce costs.

Council members indicated consensus to allow staff to pursue the 60-day, vendor-provided pilot in order to gather local data and assess effectiveness before any purchase or long-term commitment. The work session adjourned and moved into the regular council meeting.