APD Provides Answers On Flock Camera Uses, Data Sharing, Placement

ALEXANDRIA, VA — Alexandria police have provided new details about the city's use of automatic license plate readers, including information on data sharing, where cameras are placed, a pending third-party audit, and more.

The Alexandria Police Department provided the answers in response to questions from the City Council's Sept. 8 legislative meeting about auditing and oversight, privacy, data sharing, retention and the city's planned transition away from Flock Safety.

The responses offer additional information about how Alexandria's license plate reader program operates as city officials consider its future. APD currently has 61 fixed Flock automatic license plate readers operating in the city.

Who Has Access To APD's Data And For What Purpose?

APD says the department can restrict or revoke access to its cameras and has already done so in some cases.

APD said it has restricted ALPR access for all 12 Virginia Flock customers who cooperate with ICE and is considering additional restrictions, including requiring outside agencies to contact APD directly to conduct certain searches. However, police said, significantly restricting data sharing could affect Alexandria's reciprocal access to license plate information from partner law enforcement agencies.

Regarding a question about tracking people seeking abortions, APD could only say that the cameras are only accessible to law enforcement agencies for official law enforcement business, and tracking women seeking abortions would fall outside the agencies' purview.

APD clarified that while businesses, homeowners associations, apartment complexes and other private entities can voluntarily allow APD to access their Flock information, APD does not share its data with those entities.

What Happens After Data Is Supposed To Be Cleared?

Police said data can be retained beyond 21 days only when it is associated with a criminal investigation. In that situation, the information is removed from the Flock Safety system and transferred into APD's digital evidence management system.

Once transferred, it is no longer shared through or accessible from Flock's network.

Another question raised the possibility that the 21-day rule could cause potentially useful evidence to disappear before victims of sexual or domestic violence report crimes.

APD said reporting delays can extend for weeks or months and acknowledged that a shorter retention period could prevent investigators from recovering information before a report is made or an investigative lead develops.

Police also clarified that investigators do not necessarily need a license plate number to search the system. ALPR records can be searched using vehicle characteristics including make, model, color, visible damage or distinctive stickers.

How Were Camera Placements Chosen?

APD says the placement of cameras was intended to provide broad coverage around the city, and that it was deliberate in developing a deployment methodology that supported its public-safety objectives while remaining consistent with department and community values. "APD proactively engaged the Office of Race and Social Equity and the Independent Policing Auditor, sought community feedback, reviewed crime and traffic data, and considered the City’s race and social equity mapping when evaluating camera locations and deployment," it said.

Why Were 56 Searches Flagged For Review?

Among the questions was what APD's internal audit actually examined and what police found when 56 instances were flagged for additional review.

APD said a unit within its Technology Services Division audits all employee activity in the ALPR system every 30 days. The system maintains a log of user activity, and auditors check whether searches include an offense type, case or incident number and an approved reason for conducting the search.

Auditors also look for unusual activity, including repeated searches of the same vehicle by one employee, searches that appear unrelated to an employee's duties, unusually high numbers of searches and inconsistencies between case information and the reason given for a search.

APD said none of the 56 instances flagged for additional review over three years was determined to involve improper, unauthorized or illegitimate law enforcement use of the system.

The most common problems involved missing or mistyped case numbers, according to police. APD said intentional, unlawful or other serious misuse would be referred to the department's Office of Professional Responsibility.

Independent Audit Could Begin By Oct. 1

APD said it expects third-party audits to begin by Oct. 1, although procurement and access to the system remain subject to legal review.

APD is finalizing an agreement with Robin Engel, an Ohio State University criminologist and policing researcher, to include the ALPR program in her independent work. Engel is already reviewing APD's traffic-stop and use-of-force data and practices.

Alexandria's Independent Police Auditor could also potentially review APD's ALPR audit reports, police said.

City Can Stop Flock Service At Any Time

APD said its current contract expires in April 2027, but that the city can stop Flock service at any time.

APD is already evaluating other license plate readers systems and will meet with vendors in the coming weeks. There is no deadline to change the service, APD said.

APD said its research has not found a readily available ALPR system that functions like a speed camera by capturing images only when a specific legal violation occurs, another alternative raised in the questions. The department said it will continue evaluating other technologies and approaches.

The department is also planning public outreach as Alexandria considers the future of the program. Sept. 24 and Oct. 7 have been identified as tentative dates for community listening sessions, with events planned in locations convenient to residents on both the east and west sides of the city.

Read more of APD's answers here.