Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flock Cameras topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
West Linn council pauses consideration of Flock license-plate readers after privacy and policy questions
Summary
After a presentation from West Linn Police and vendor Flock Safety, the council directed staff to pause and gather community feedback on ALPR cameras, raising concerns about data retention, search auditing, false positives and public-records access.
West Linn’s council paused further action on a proposed automatic license-plate reader (ALPR) system after a lengthy presentation by police and Flock Safety representatives and robust council questioning about privacy, data sharing and policy controls.
Chief Mahuna told the council the department has explored ALPR technology after a 2023 series of vehicle-related crimes and said the system could extend limited staff capacity. David Johnson, Flock Safety’s regional account executive, and Kristen McLeod, the company’s community engagement manager, described the vendor’s model, retention settings and auditing tools. McLeod said the vendor sets a default 30-day retention and that ‘‘images are hard deleted and unrecoverable’’ if not retained as evidence.
Councilors and residents asked detailed questions about how searches would be justified and audited. Councilor Groner pressed Chief Mahuna on what constitutes a valid search reason; the chief said searches would be tied to investigations (for example, a suspect vehicle in a series of car prowls) and that the system creates an audit trail. Christine McLeod of Flock told the council the system requires a search reason and logs the user ID so department administrators can flag misuse.
Privacy and public-records issues were a recurring theme. A public commenter who identified community concerns said, ‘‘The only way to avoid this data collection would be to give up driving altogether,'’ arguing that ALPRs collect movement data on essentially all drivers. Council President Baumgartner asked whether images or search results would be public records and was told departments generally write policies that limit access to data unless needed for a criminal investigation; the vendor said it does not sell or share customer data and that retention and sharing settings are controlled by the city.
Flock representatives and the chief described safeguards including encrypted storage, search reasons and optional public transparency portals that agencies can publish to show usage statistics. Johnson said agencies using Flock have used the system to help locate stolen vehicles, missing persons and investigative leads; McLeod described case studies where cameras contributed to arrests and recoveries.
Despite the potential investigative value, councilors raised unanswered questions about false positives, third-party sharing (including out-of-state queries), personnel access limits and public-records burdens. Councilors asked staff to gather additional information about policies adopted by other Oregon agencies, clarify how many department staff would need access and identify budget implications and alternative uses of the proposed funds.
On the chief’s recommendation, and after discussion, the council chose to pause procurement and directed staff to gather community feedback, draft department policy examples and return with recommendations on governance, budget and records implications before any purchasing decision.
Next steps: staff will organize external engagement and bring policy options and budget estimates back to council for further discussion before any formal action.
