Cave Creek council directs staff to draft policy for license‑plate reader cameras after privacy concerns

The Cave Creek Town Council voted unanimously April 21 to direct staff to draft a formal policy governing the town’s license‑plate reader (LPR) cameras after residents and some council members raised privacy and security concerns.

Town Attorney Bill, who reviewed the town’s contract with vendor Flock, told the council the agreement gives the town ownership of the data and limits access to authorized users but retains images for 30 days under the current contract. He urged the council to consider the Safford Police Department’s policy as a model, which includes a longer retention period, audit controls and explicit restrictions on use. “The contract is good, but it doesn’t get you all the way there,” Bill said, adding that a formal local policy could address constituent concerns while preserving the tool’s investigatory value.

Marshall Stein, Cave Creek’s marshal, described several cases in which the system helped investigations, including identifying a suspect vehicle in a town shooting, recovering missing persons and assisting a hit‑and‑run investigation. He said only one sworn town employee currently has access and that access is subject to state auditing through the Arizona Criminal Justice Information System. “It’s a very well‑regulated process,” Stein said, noting misuse could result in employment termination and loss of police certification.

Residents and councilors raised objections and questions during the discussion. One resident said the cameras risk creating “a portfolio on everyone” and asked what proof the town had that vendor safeguards are effective. Another asked whether Flock had ever been hacked; Bill said Flock had assured him the company had not been hacked, and staff said they would follow up with vendor assurances and technical details.

Council members also probed operational issues: how many cameras are deployed and whether temporary cameras were used for special events such as Bike Week; where data are stored (on‑site or off‑site); and whether signs should alert drivers to LPR presence. Several councilors suggested posting signage at town entrances rather than next to cameras to avoid vandalism.

A motion to direct staff to draft a tailored policy passed by voice vote. Council asked staff to return with a proposed policy and additional information on camera counts and locations, data storage and vendor security, and possible community‑notification measures.

The council’s next step is for staff and the town attorney to draft policy language and return to the council for further direction and potential formal adoption.