A newly disclosed surveillance agreement reveals how 20 license plate cameras in a West Virginia county connect deputies to a nationwide tracking system, allow hundreds of outside agencies to search local vehicle records and raise questions about privacy protections.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
A West Virginia sheriff’s office operating 20 automated license plate cameras has access to a nationwide surveillance system processing approximately 10 billion additional vehicle scans each month, according to newly released contract documents that reveal the extent of the county’s participation in Flock Safety’s law enforcement network.
The agreement between the Monongalia County Sheriff’s Office and Flock Safety became public amid growing congressional scrutiny of automated vehicle tracking technology. Federal lawmakers from both political parties have introduced legislation seeking to restrict government access to license plate surveillance systems, while a county audit shows that nearly 1,000 outside law enforcement organizations have permission to search Monongalia County’s own camera records.
The contract, examined in an Oct. 7 investigation by WV News, establishes that the county purchased considerably more than roadside equipment for identifying vehicles. Its subscription includes nationwide database access, searches based on vehicle characteristics other than license plate numbers and information-sharing capabilities that extend beyond the jurisdiction of the local sheriff’s office.
The disclosure comes as Congress considers competing approaches to restricting automated license plate readers, commonly called ALPRs. On Oct. 2, Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon and independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont announced the Ban Flock Act, a proposal intended to prohibit federal agencies from using the technology and restrict federal funding for state and local governments that continue deploying such systems.
Sanders criticized the growing use of automated surveillance in a statement published on X, linking the technology to concerns about government monitoring and corporate control of personal information.
“We cannot allow America to become a surveillance state where AI oligarchs profit by giving the government the power to track our every movement,” Sanders said.
Republican Rep. Greg Steube of Florida has advanced a different legislative approach. His proposal, introduced Sept. 24, would prohibit federal agencies from searching Flock camera records without obtaining a warrant.
Steube previously expressed concern about the potential misuse of surveillance tools after an incident involving a Sarasota police officer. In an Aug. 20 statement, he warned against allowing the government’s technological capabilities to expand without corresponding constitutional safeguards.
“When you give the government the ability to track people, someone WILL abuse it,” Steube said. “Our Fourth Amendment rights don’t disappear because technology advances. BLOCK THE FLOCK!”
The separate proposals reflect concerns across party lines about how automated vehicle identification systems are used, who may access their records and whether investigators should be required to obtain judicial authorization before searching vehicle location histories. The legislation differs in scope, with the Ban Flock Act proposing broader restrictions on federal use and funding and Steube’s measure focusing on warrant requirements for federal searches.
In Monongalia County, the newly available documents offer a detailed example of the capabilities provided to a local law enforcement agency through a commercial surveillance contract.
Sheriff Todd Forbes entered into the agreement with Flock on Nov. 13, 2025, committing the county to payments totaling $177,600 over 36 months. The arrangement carries an annual cost of $59,200 and includes an automatic renewal provision unless either party supplies the required advance notice.
The agreement covers 20 automated license plate reader cameras. A Sheriff’s Office audit determined that 19 had been installed and were operational as of June 25.
The contract was subsequently added to the department’s Flock Transparency Portal after the portal initially became available without the agreement. County Commissioner Sean Sikora addressed the omission during an Oct. 7 commission meeting and indicated that the document should be publicly accessible.
The equipment captures information about vehicles passing within camera view, but the county’s subscription also permits authorized users to search records collected by other participating camera systems.
Under the Flock Safety Platform Essentials service, deputies can access state and nationwide networks, subject to the permissions established by participating organizations. The company’s national system provides access to approximately 10 billion additional license plate observations monthly, although the specific information available to individual departments depends on data-sharing configurations.
Investigators may also seek access to privately operated Flock cameras installed at businesses, schools and residential developments, expanding the potential sources of vehicle information beyond government-owned roadside equipment.
A separate search capability, marketed as “Vehicle Fingerprint,” allows investigators to identify vehicles without knowing their registration numbers. Instead, officers can search for physical characteristics such as manufacturer, model or vehicle type, exterior color, registration state, bumper stickers, decals and roof racks. The software can also account for vehicles displaying obscured or missing license plates.
Other functions permit searches within specified geographical areas and time periods, customized watch lists and automated alerts associated with records maintained by the FBI’s National Crime Information Center and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Those features create a distinction between a camera that records vehicles at one intersection and a searchable system capable of connecting vehicle observations across multiple locations and participating jurisdictions.
The county’s internal audit provides additional information about how the department has deployed those capabilities.
Between Jan. 1 and June 25, investigators conducted 188 searches categorized as drug or narcotics investigations, making that the most frequently recorded category. Another 108 searches were classified as “Other,” while 52 involved financial crimes, 40 concerned traffic infractions and 35 were associated with welfare checks.
Additional searches involved alcohol-related violations, stalking, disorderly conduct, curfew offenses and loitering, demonstrating that the technology was used across a wider range of investigations than stolen vehicle recovery.
The department identified several investigations in which camera information helped officers locate suspects or vehicles. A May 13 alert, for example, identified a vehicle associated with a murder suspect being sought by the U.S. Marshals Service. The audit also documented arrests connected to stolen vehicles, stolen license plates and outstanding warrants.
The system’s user records show that access extended beyond sheriff’s deputies. As of June 25, 62 users were identified as active, including 34 deputies, 26 MECCA 911 dispatchers and two officers assigned to the Mon Metro Drug Task Force. Seven additional personnel were restricted to training access pending completion of necessary requirements.
Another portion of the audit listed 73 total accounts, including 61 active accounts, seven associated with incomplete training and five that had been deactivated. Auditors also discovered that a former Sheriff’s Office employee retained access after leaving the department. That authorization was terminated once the problem was identified.
The review examined a random selection of users and their searches, along with search records covering March 23 through June 25. Auditors concluded that the reviewed activity appeared consistent with departmental policy, including requirements to document investigative reasons and case numbers.
The report did not identify improper searches or other policy violations during its review. It recommended quarterly examinations of user accounts, high-volume searching, alerts, customized watch lists and information-sharing arrangements.
One of the most significant findings concerned the number of organizations authorized to search the county’s vehicle records.
According to the audit, 980 law enforcement organizations had searchable access to information collected by Monongalia County’s cameras. The department configured its system to share records automatically with nonfederal law enforcement agencies throughout West Virginia and within a 50-mile radius.
The sheriff’s office reported that its camera network was not discoverable nationwide. Agencies beyond the authorized geographical boundaries therefore could not independently locate the county’s network through nationwide discovery settings. Outside permissions were also limited to searches and alerts.
Those restrictions mean that Monongalia County may search portions of the broader Flock network without automatically permitting every participating agency across the country to search its own records.
Questions about control of the information also extend to the contractual rights granted to Flock itself.
Although the county retains ownership of the information captured by its cameras, the company’s August 2026 contractual terms contain provisions allowing Flock to use customer data in operating and developing its services.
“Customer hereby grants to Flock a limited, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide license to (a) use and disclose Customer Data to provide the Flock Services; and (b) use Customer Data to support and improve Flock’s products and services,” the agreement states.
The provisions also explicitly prohibit Flock from selling customer data. According to the company’s contractual language, information remains the property of the customer, while Flock receives permission to use it for specified business and operational purposes.
The perpetual nature of that license does not itself transfer ownership to the company. Flock maintains that the provision is necessary to support and improve its services, including after an individual customer’s agreement ends.
The terms also establish responsibilities concerning authorized users and the removal of access when employees or other approved personnel are no longer permitted to use the system. Certain confidential information is generally subject to deletion within 90 days of termination upon a customer’s request, although exceptions apply to records that must be retained for legal or other permitted reasons.
An important distinction remains between the published August 2026 terms and the agreement signed by the county in November 2025. Because Flock updated its online conditions after the original contract was executed, the version in effect at the time of signing is relevant to determining the county’s original obligations.
The sheriff’s signature on the order form incorporates the company’s separate online terms, meaning the shorter purchasing document does not contain every provision governing the relationship.
Flock has maintained that the camera networks are controlled by participating customers rather than operating as a single unrestricted database available to every law enforcement agency.
In a June 2025 explanation of network sharing and federal cooperation, the company described its technology as a system in which individual customers retain ownership of the information generated by their cameras and determine how that information is shared.
“Flock Safety’s License Plate Reader (LPR) platform is made up of individual cameras that submit data about cars to a user interface, with that data owned by each individual customer. Each LPR in the customer’s network captures vehicular evidence to solve crime,” the company stated.
A Flock spokesperson declined to discuss the specific arrangements governing the West Virginia installation when contacted by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
“Flock does not share specifics regarding individual agency contracts, camera counts, locations or deployments,” the spokesperson said. “The customer agency is the best source for this information.”
The spokesperson directed the publication to the company’s explanation of camera sharing, searching and auditing procedures.
Neither the Monongalia County Sheriff’s Office nor the Monongalia County Commission immediately responded to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s requests for comment.
The West Virginia installation represents a relatively small portion of Flock’s broader surveillance infrastructure. Cybersecurity researcher Joshua Michael mapped more than 300,000 devices associated with the company’s network in September, illustrating the scale of its reported deployment footprint.
The growing availability of vehicle location records has produced disagreements over the appropriate balance between investigative capabilities and individual privacy. Police departments have cited the technology’s usefulness in identifying stolen vehicles, locating suspects and assisting criminal investigations. Lawmakers seeking restrictions have raised concerns about tracking people without warrants, unauthorized searches and the ability to reconstruct vehicle movements over time.
For Monongalia County, the newly disclosed agreement establishes both the financial commitment and the investigative resources accompanying its cameras. It also documents the extent of outside access to locally collected information, the company’s contractual data rights and the internal procedures intended to monitor authorized use.
As Congress considers restrictions on automated license plate surveillance, the county’s records demonstrate how a relatively modest local camera installation can function as part of a much larger interconnected law enforcement database, with access and sharing boundaries determined through contractual terms, customer permissions and departmental policies.
Original article
Comments