Citizen Portal

Get email alerts on the Police Alpr topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ashland police explain license-plate reader program, data safeguards

Board of City Commissioners of Ashland, Kentucky · August 14, 2026

Summary

Police described the city's automated license-plate reader (ALPR) program, saying the system records plate images and timestamps but "doesn't record video" or facial images; staff said non-hit images are retained 30 days and audit logs are permanent. House Bill 58 and public-transparency portals were discussed.

City police briefed the Board of City Commissioners on Aug. 13 about the department’s automated license-plate reader program, explaining past uses, legal safeguards and transparency measures.

Chief Todd Kelly said the department began using ALPR technology in 2019 and has used different vendors over time; the current rollout includes the brand Flock among others. The chief emphasized limits on what ALPR captures: "It didn't record video. It didn't capture facial images," and said officers must confirm any plate hit before taking enforcement action.

An assistant chief (transcript identifies him as Ryan Connolly in one place and Conley in another) explained operational details: the system takes an image of a plate, converts it to text, records location and time, compares plates against databases and can generate alerts when a vehicle matches a hot list (NCIC, missing-person, Amber Alert). On data retention, staff said, "We currently store those for 30 days," and that audit logs of searches and user activity are preserved and reviewed every 90 days.

Commissioners asked about sharing and statutory requirements; staff said the department generally shares data with Kentucky agencies within approximately a 200-mile radius and that recent state law changes (referred to in the transcript as House Bill 58, effective July 15) codify penalties for misuse. Staff pointed commissioners to a public transparency portal where the ALPR policy and lists of sharing partners are published.

The presentation addressed common concerns such as tracking and facial recognition. Staff said the technology provides point-in-time plate sightings, not continuous tracking, and asserted the department’s policy prohibits uses such as immigration enforcement, traffic enforcement, harassment or use based solely on protected characteristics. The department described ongoing efforts to make retention and access limits more restrictive than state minimums.

AI generated

The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.

AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.

Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.

Source