Commerce council votes to reapply for MVCPA grant that funds Flock LPR cameras amid privacy debate

Commerce City Council on Tuesday authorized the city manager to reapply for a Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority (MVCPA) grant that funds a Flock automated license‑plate reader (LPR) system, following an extended presentation and public discussion about privacy safeguards.

City Manager Howdy Lisonbee told the council the action tonight would only seek grant funding and would not authorize execution of any final agreement. Lisonbee said the administration is sensitive to concerns raised by residents and framed the debate around three themes the city has heard: Fourth Amendment implications, what data the system collects, and who can access that data.

"The data points within our database are deleted and eliminated after 30 days," Lisonbee said, describing the Commerce configuration that keeps only vehicle-identifying photographs and associated metadata for short-term BOLO (be on the lookout) searches. "That way there is no way to use the database that we've configured to create a mosaic to start tracking an individual. We're not tracking individuals." (City Manager Howdy Lisonbee)

Police Chief Weatherford outlined how the system is deployed locally and gave examples where LPR data helped investigations. He said the city uses 15 stationary Falcon LPR cameras that take still photographs, upload images only when the software identifies a vehicle of interest, and require officers to associate searches with a valid case or call-for-service number before accessing the database.

"This tool allows us to be more efficient, more expedient, and ensure that we can do that the best that we possibly can," Chief Weatherford said, describing regional cases where LPR data contributed to identifying suspect vehicles, recovering stolen property and supporting arrests. (Chief Weatherford)

Several residents questioned whether the data really is deleted and whether records could be treated as public. Jean Claus, a long-time resident, praised the grant as a public-safety benefit: "I see this as a win-win situation for public safety of our systems," she said. Robert (Rob) Ford, another resident, said he had researched other jurisdictions and cited a court ruling finding captured data public in one instance; he asked whether deletion claims are meaningful in practice.

"Washington court rules that data captured on Flock safety cameras are public record," Ford said, and asked whether images could be recovered or reused across jurisdictions. (Robert Ford)

City staff responded that Commerce controls its database, that federal agencies cannot access the data without express permission from the city's administration under the current configuration, and that access requires authorized personnel to input a case number and justify searches. Lisonbee and the chief said the system shares data with other law-enforcement agencies only when authorized and insisted contractual and technical safeguards restrict third‑party use.

Council members also heard technical clarifications: the deployed Falcon hardware captures still photos (not live video), the proprietary analysis only uploads images with vehicle data, and uploaded records retain vehicle make, model, color, license plate and state; personal identity data are not part of the record, staff said.

After staff answered questions and after public comment, the council voted to authorize staff to reapply for the MVCPA grant that funds the Flock system. Council members emphasized that if the city later seeks to execute or expand an agreement the council will be presented with a policy 'guardrail' document for review, quarterly public reporting on the system's use, and the ongoing option to discontinue use if grants are not renewed.

What's next: staff will submit the grant application per the motion; if the grant is awarded, the city says it will bring a formal agreement and a policy document outlining usage guardrails and reporting back to the council for approval.