Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oshkosh postpones Flock ALPR renewal after hours of public concern over privacy and security
Summary
After a multi-hour presentation by police and Flock Safety and an unusually large public comment period raising cybersecurity, data-sharing and civil-liberty concerns, the Oshkosh Common Council voted to lay over the planned two-year renewal of Flock automated license-plate readers until its April 21 meeting.
The Oshkosh Common Council postponed a planned two-year renewal of its contract with Flock Safety for automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) after a multi-hour council presentation and a lengthy public comment period on March 31.
Police and Flock representatives described how the ALPR system operates, how captured images are encrypted and hosted on a cloud service, and what local policies and audit tools have been put in place. The department showed examples of investigations aided by ALPR alerts — including hit-and-run and robbery investigations — and Flock staff described automated deletion of images on a 30-day schedule and the company’s position that it does not sell customer ALPR data.
However, roughly two dozen speakers — residents, cybersecurity professionals and privacy advocates — pressed councilmembers with detailed concerns: known cybersecurity vulnerabilities reported in third-party security databases, instances in other jurisdictions where officers misused ALPR searches for personal reasons, broad interagency sharing of ALPR data across hundreds of agencies and a perceived lack of legally enforceable, city-level protections, independent audit access and firmer limits on data retention and external access.
Council members debated the technical and policy presentations and the volume of community concern. Several members said they wanted more time to review contract terms and to allow additional public engagement; the council voted to postpone the renewal until its April 21 meeting, and directed staff to prepare follow-up materials and any recommended contract safeguards for the next meeting.
What remains unresolved: the council requested clearer, written commitments about interagency sharing controls, independent audit access, proof of multi-factor authentication and a precise, legally enforceable retention limit tied to city-owned data. The department said it will bring additional documentation to the next meeting; the public may expect another major public hearing at that time.
