Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety Surveillance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Worthington Hills reviews proposed Flock Safety license‑plate camera contract

Worthington Hills City Commission · February 17, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners reviewed a proposal to place Flock Safety automated license‑plate readers at several sites; the mayor said cameras would be assigned to LMPD and cost about $3,000 per unit per year. The commission asked members to submit questions ahead of a March 17 vendor call.

The Worthington Hills City Commission heard a presentation on Feb. 17 about a proposed contract with Flock Safety for automatic license‑plate reader (ALPR) cameras.

Mayor Robert Stoneham described the system and the procurement plan, saying the company’s devices are an "automatic license reading system" and explaining locations shown in city-provided visuals. The mayor said the final camera sites will be set after contract signature and that the cost is roughly $3,000 per unit per year. He added that the cameras would be assigned to the Louisville Metro Police Department for alert handling, not monitored directly by commissioners.

Commissioners were asked to review the projected locations and bring questions for a scheduled vendor conference-call; if there are no objections the commission could vote at the March 17 meeting to approve or decline the contract. The mayor said service billing would begin when the first camera is activated and that only a small number of poles (four or five) would be installed.

Supporters in the presentation highlighted public-safety uses such as locating stolen vehicles; commissioners asked for additional contract details and clarifications about data access and operations before a final decision.

No formal procurement vote was taken on Feb. 17; commissioners agreed to review materials and prepare questions for the next meeting.

Next procedural step: a vendor call and possible vote at the March 17 commission meeting.