Vendor defends ALPR tech; Flock emphasizes audits, retention and local control

Carl Bach, identified as a public‑affairs representative for Flock Safety, gave a technical overview of automated license‑plate readers to the Oviedo City Council at the work session and fielded extensive questions from council members.

Bach described the system as a point‑in‑time imaging tool that transmits encrypted still photos (plate, make, model, color) to Amazon Web Services for a retention period that is customizable by customer policy, with 30 days the default. He said the vendor does not perform facial recognition, does not connect to DMV records, and does not generate traffic citations. Bach also emphasized audit logging that records who ran a search, the case number and the selected offense type: “Every search is rolled up into an audit trail,” he said, pointing to recently added automated audit‑assistance tools and planned lockouts for flagged users.

Council members pressed on several functionality and control points: whether bumper‑sticker content or other AI‑enabled attribute searches were available (Bach said Oviedo had not purchased additional AI attributes and that searches of that sort would be a paid product), whether outside jurisdictions with access could perform enhanced searches on Oviedo’s images (Bach said sharing is selectable by the customer but acknowledged that an outside agency could use tools it had purchased), how deletion and irrevocability of images is verified, and whether the software can require multi‑person approval before a search runs (Bach said role‑based permissions exist but routine pre‑search co‑signatures are not a standard option). The police chief said the department reviewed policy and reduced access to out‑of‑state agencies.

Council members and staff asked for follow‑ups and documentation about the firm’s audit‑assist features, retention architecture, and any available settings to require proactive checklist verification of case numbers. Staff also noted that the contract’s non‑appropriation clause and budget timing would affect removal timing; the council later directed staff not to carry forward LPR funding into FY26–27 and to remove the cameras by the end of the fiscal year.