Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Alpr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Burbank debate sharpens over Flock license‑plate readers as council weighs renewal
Summary
Hundreds of residents pressed the council June 2 over the city’s contract for Flock automated license‑plate readers, citing privacy, out‑of‑state access, and cybersecurity incidents; police and supporters said the system helps solve crimes and recover missing children. Council directed staff and police to increase oversight and reporting while the budget was adopted.
Burbank — Hundreds of residents pressed the Burbank City Council June 2 during an extended public‑comment period to cancel the city’s contract with Flock, the company that supplies automated license‑plate readers (ALPRs) used by the Burbank Police Department.
Opponents urged the council to let the contract lapse when it is next scheduled for renewal, saying the cameras create continuous surveillance, that cloud‑stored scans may be accessible outside California, and citing reported hacks and federal queries in other cities. Raven Flynn, a resident, told the council the technology is “a stalker’s dream” and urged officials to cancel existing and future contracts.
Supporters, including the Burbank Police Officers Association, said the ALPR network has returned clear public‑safety benefits. Police Association president Cameron Manuri said officers rely on the system to locate abducted children, stolen vehicles and suspects who quickly leave the city. Police Chief Raphael Canary told council staff and residents that Burbank crime‑solvability rates improved after ALPR deployment and that roughly 77% of arrests tied to ALPR leads involved nonresidents who drove into the city.
Chief Canary and staff described several safeguards: the ALPR system used by Burbank is configured to capture license plates and vehicle attributes (not facial biometrics), data are retained on a rolling 30‑day basis, and the vendor operates under Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS/DOJ) compliance standards. The department said it logs every query (user ID, camera identifier, timestamp and reason), runs internal audits and had moved to monthly audits amid heightened scrutiny.
Council members pushed staff and the police chief for further procedural reforms: more frequent public reporting to the Police Commission (the chief agreed to annual reporting and to consider increased frequency), an independent audit in the next oversight contract cycle, explicit public posting of search logs (redacting investigative details), and continued documentation of where and how data are shared. The police chief said he would work with staff to expand transparency and to monitor alternative vendors.
The debate was a central theme of the evening and factored into broader budget discussions; the department uses an asset‑forfeiture account to pay for the system, the chief said. Council did not vote to cancel the contract at the meeting; instead staff were directed to provide additional audits and to include ALPR oversight in upcoming Police Commission and independent‑review work.
What happens next: Council asked staff and police to return with a plan for public reporting, to accelerate independent audits and to include ALPR and other new surveillance technologies in the next oversight‑contract scope. Any formal decision about contract renewal or termination will require a future council action.
