Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Cameras topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conway police defend use of Flock license‑plate cameras, say system helped locate suspects
Summary
Conway Police Chief Harris told council the department paid for 20 Flock license‑plate cameras with asset‑forfeiture funds, asserted the system captures rear vehicle images not faces, retains images 30 days, and can aid investigations; council asked for contractor access details and a live demonstration.
Conway Police Chief Harris told the City Council on April 28 that Conway’s 20 Flock cameras were bought with asset‑forfeiture funds and are used only as license‑plate readers, not for facial recognition.
Harris, answering questions, said the department’s contract covers a three‑year term and that Conway keeps Flock images for 30 days even though the system can store up to 150. “They are fixed cameras, license plate readers only,” he said. “There’s no facial recognition. We don't have access to any type of facial recognition.”
The chief described practical benefits: the system, he said, helped locate homicide suspects hiding in Conway, led to capture of a fugitive by U.S. Marshals, and has been used to track missing juveniles and hit‑and‑run vehicles. “Within 30 minutes, they call me back, said we have 3 of the 4 in custody,” Harris said describing a past case in which a license‑plate hit aided an arrest.
Council members raised privacy and oversight questions. One councilor asked who can search the system and whether a log is kept; Harris replied, “It logs it. Just like anything, like our reporting system… if somebody goes into a certain police report, it'll keep a track of who everybody who's been in that police report.” Another councilor asked what would happen if an employee used the system inappropriately; Harris said it would prompt an investigation and could lead to removal of ACIC access or employment action.
Council members also asked whether Flock employees can access Conway’s data. Harris said he will confirm contract details and whether contractor employees are restricted from viewing or exporting searchable data: “I can look and get a better answer… I’ll get clarification on this.” Members requested that a Flock representative appear for a demonstration; Harris agreed to arrange a demonstration of the search interface so councilors can see what a search returns.
The council did not take any formal action on the cameras at the meeting. Council members asked staff to follow up with documentation of the contract access rules and to schedule a demonstration and briefing for the full council.
