Jump to content

User:Louis/Apex license plate reader program

From Consumer Rights Wiki

Apex, North Carolina police photograph about 60,000 license plates a day with seven automatic license plate reader cameras, which track cars by plate number.[1][2] Resident George Hogan told the Town Council that on a six-minute drive to his children's gymnastics, Apex police and Flock photographed my car 50 times.[3] The council bought that network from Flock Safety inside its consent agenda, the block an Apex agenda calls routine & enacted by one motion ... and without discussion.[4] It approved the contract there twice, 4-0 in June 2023 & 5-0 in January 2025, & nobody pulled it out of the block.[5][6] On the second vote the town manager told the council it would vote that night & that policy would follow later.[6] State law requires that policy before the automatic license plate reader system is operational.[7] Sixteen months on, the council was still referring it to a committee that cannot take binding action.[8][6] Apex should not renew the $71,750 contract when it expires on January 31, 2027, & should not add the ten cameras it has budgeted.[9][10]

[edit | edit source]

Apex's council has never taken a separate vote on whether to put license plate cameras on its streets. Both approvals rode inside the consent agenda, the block of business an Apex agenda describes as routine & enacted by one motion with the adoption of the Consent Agenda, and without discussion.[4] Any one council member can remove an item from that block & have it considered on its own.[4] The plate reader contract went through twice & no member removed it either time.[5][6]

June 27, 2023 approval and the licensing delay

[edit | edit source]

Police Chief Jason Armstrong introduced the system at a work session on March 21, 2023, describing a license plate recognition camera already deployed in Raleigh & Garner that lets investigators go back and look at the surrounding area.[5] No vote was taken.[5] Three months later it arrived as consent item CN4, a Master Services Agreement running July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025 for FlockOS, Flock Safety Falcon, Flock Safety Falcon Flex, & Flock Safety Advanced Search.[5]

The mechanism for pulling an item worked that night. Mayor Jacques K. Gilbert noted a staff request to remove consent item 9, an encroachment agreement at 1251 Burma Drive, & Councilmember Terry Mahaffey moved to approve the consent agenda with Consent Item 9 removed.[5] Councilmember Arno Zegerman seconded, & the vote was unanimous at 4-0 with Mayor Pro Tempore Killingsworth absent.[5] The encroachment agreement was worth pulling out of the block. The plate readers were not.[5]

No cameras went up. The staff coversheet prepared for the replacement contract explains why:

The Town Council approved a similar agreement at its June 27, 2023 meeting. However, due to licensing issues with Flock the instituting of that agreement was delayed. Those issues have been resolved. This agreement will replace and update that previous agreement.

[9]

A June 2026 department slide dates the gap: contract approved in 2023, but no system deployment until late 2025.[11] That delay handed the town more than two years between its first approval & its first plate read.[5][11]

The staff cover sheet for the January 14, 2025 consent agenda prices the Flock Group agreement at $36,750.00 in year one and $35,000.00 in year two, for a total of $71,750.00, and records that the June 27, 2023 agreement was delayed by licensing issues with Flock.[9]

January 14, 2025 approval with policy deferred

[edit | edit source]

The replacement returned as consent item CN8, filed by Interim Chief of Police Trevor Materasso, at $36,750 in year one & $35,000 in year two for a total of $71,750.[9] The coversheet names Article 3D of Chapter 20 of the North Carolina General Statutes as the law governing plate reader use, so the governing statute was cited in the council's own packet.[9]

Before the vote, the mayor raised the policy discussion scheduled for the following month. The minutes record what happened next:

Mayor Gilbert noted that there would be further discussion on Consent Item 8 at the February 18, 2025 Work Session related to the Flock Camera Safety Contract. Town Manager Vosburg said that the item would still remain on the Consent Agenda, and Council would be voting to approve the Contract tonight. He said the further discussion at the Work Session would be for policy implementation of the Contract.

[6]

Councilmember Killingsworth then moved to approve the consent agenda as presented, Mayor Pro Tempore Gray seconded, & the vote was unanimous at 5-0.[6] The Peak Weekly, a local newsletter, recorded the sequence as the Flock agreement was approved by council 5-0 before finalizing any policy guardrails.[12]

Minutes of the January 14, 2025 meeting record Town Manager Vosburg saying the Flock Camera Safety Contract would stay on the consent agenda and that Council would vote on it that night, with policy implementation left to the February 18, 2025 work session, and the consent agenda passed 5-0.[13]

The statutory deadline attaches to operation, not to purchase, so the January 2025 vote did not by itself put Apex out of compliance.[7] The council committed the money first, & the town manager told it on the record, before the vote, that the rules would come later.[6]

Written policy required before the system is operational

[edit | edit source]

Article 3D of Chapter 20 of the North Carolina General Statutes governs police plate readers, as the town's own staff coversheet for the contract states.[9] Section 20-183.31(a) sets the sequence:

Any State or local law enforcement agency using an automatic license plate reader system must adopt a written policy governing its use before the automatic license plate reader system is operational.

[7]

That subsection then lists nine subjects the policy must address, including databases used for comparison, data retention, Sharing of data with other law enforcement agencies, operator training, Supervisory oversight of automatic license plate reader system use, internal data security, & annual or more frequent auditing & reporting of system use & effectiveness to the head of the agency.[7] Subsection (b) bars using the data for the enforcement of traffic violations.[7]

Nothing in the Article happens to an agency that skips step one. Article 3D carries a single penalty, & it is aimed elsewhere: Section 20-183.33 makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor to obtain, access, preserve, or disclose the data outside the Article's terms, & attaches no penalty at all to an agency that never adopts the written policy.[14][15] Apex bought the cameras in January 2025 & was still routing the policy to a committee in June 2026.[6][8]

Section 20-183.31(a) requires a law enforcement agency to adopt a written policy before the automatic license plate reader system is operational and lists nine subjects the policy must address, including annual or more frequent auditing and reporting to the head of the agency.[7]

The department says it does the auditing the statute asks for. Johansen described that work to the January 29, 2026 work session:

Additionally, our system is audited on the regular by the on-duty sergeants, and then there is an annual structured audit of the system that is meant to go in and look for any anomalies or any repeat behaviors that are indicating someone might be abusing it.

[16]

He added that all of that is required by law & that the department takes it up another level.[16]

Section 20-183.32 governs retention & disclosure. Captured plate data shall not be preserved for more than 90 days after the date the data is captured, absent a preservation request, a state search warrant, or a federal one.[17] Subsection (e) makes the data confidential & not a public record, & permits disclosure only to a criminal justice officer at a State or local law enforcement agency or a similar official at a federal law enforcement agency, for a legitimate law enforcement purpose & on a written request from the requesting agency.[17] Selling the data is barred outright.[17]

The 90-day ceiling is a ceiling, & Apex set its own retention at 30 days.[18] Disclosure to a federal law enforcement official, for a legitimate law enforcement purpose & on a written request, is expressly allowed.[17]

Order form line items, 30-day retention, and who owns the data

[edit | edit source]

The order form adopted in that one motion lists FlockOS, five Flock Safety Falcon cameras, five Flock Safety Falcon Flex cameras, & Flock Safety Advanced Search, each priced as included in the subscription.[19] The only itemized charge is a standard implementation fee of $350.00 per camera on five cameras, $1,750.00.[19] Year one subtotals $36,750.00, the annual recurring subtotal is $35,000.00, discounts run $1,500.00, estimated tax is $5,201.88, & the contract total is $71,750.00.[19] Initial term 24 months, renewal term 24 months, retention period 30 days, customer legal entity NC - Apex PD at 205 Saunders St.[19] The copy the council voted on was unexecuted, with the signature & date lines blank for both parties; the customer name & title lines carry pre-printed text reading Randal E. Vosburg & Town Manager, while Flock's are blank.[19]

Camera counts do not reconcile against that document. The order form buys five Falcon & five Falcon Flex.[19] Speaking to the council on June 9, 2026, Chief Ryan Johansen said The contract that was originally signed called for seven regular cameras fixed and three flex.[20] He said the three flex cameras were undeployed & that the department was working to cut the order to two flex so that eight cameras would be installed.[20]

Section 4.1 of the Master Services Agreement gives the town title to the record. As between Flock & the customer, all right, title and interest in the Customer Data, belong to and are retained solely by Customer, & Flock does not own and shall not sell Customer Data.[21] Section 5.3 gives Flock a separate route to the same footage:

Subject to and during the Retention Period, and if permitted by North Carolina law, Flock may access, use, preserve and/or disclose the Footage to law enforcement authorities, government officials, and/or third parties, if legally required to do so or if Flock has a good faith belief that such access, use, preservation or disclosure is reasonably necessary to comply with a legal process, enforce this Agreement, or detect, prevent or otherwise address security, privacy, fraud or technical issues, or emergency situations.

[21]

A separate grant in section 4.3 lets Flock collect & anonymize customer data & use it to run the services, including the training of machine learning algorithms, & separately grants Flock a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free right to use & distribute that anonymized data to improve its services & other Flock offerings.[21]

Apex holds title to every plate read; the vendor holds a standing permission, for as long as the data exists, to hand that footage to law enforcement authorities, government officials, & third parties on its own good faith belief that doing so is reasonably necessary for one of the purposes the section lists.[21] Title without exclusive custody is a weaker thing than the word ownership suggests. One clause runs the other way: section 11.15 lets Apex terminate for non-appropriation on thirty (30) days written notice without penalty or other cost.[21]

Data sharing with more than a thousand agencies

[edit | edit source]

What Apex promised residents about that federal question was firmer than the statute. Johansen told the council on June 9, 2026 that the department shares with other law enforcement agencies, police departments, sheriff's offices, law enforcement agencies only, with No private sharing, no sharing with federal agencies.[22] An outside searcher must enter a case number & a criminal offense code, the same entries an Apex officer must make.[23]

Who can approve an outside agency's access has two accounts in the record, four months apart. On January 29, 2026 Johansen told the work session:

any agency that wants to see the data that comes off of our cameras must request that permission directly from us. The only person that can approve that is the captain that is in charge of the Flock program, so there's no way that any employee can say I'm going to approve for this agency to see our data. They cannot do that.

[24]

On June 9, 2026, accounting for how two federal agencies came to be approved, he said the requests came into our civilian operator[25] & that they approved them.[26] He described that approver as a single civilian point of contact, overseen by the department's civilian Office of Professional Standards.[27]

Approval in the January account carries a condition, & the chief said plainly what the condition is worth. Apex grants a request only if the agency has signed the Flock memorandum of understanding on data sharing, plus a further Apex agreement to abide by its policies.[28] Of those agreements Johansen said:

There's not a lot of teeth behind that, to be perfectly honest. Like, we're asking them to agree to it. Not sure there will be any consequences if they didn't.

[28]

At the June 9 meeting he said that remark had been re-quoted out of context, & explained what he had meant by it: he cannot open an internal affairs investigation against an officer in another state, so he has to trust that the other department holds its own people to account.[29]

That trust extends to somewhere over a thousand police agencies at this point that we're sharing with.[30] Johansen does not treat the number as the problem:

I don't see the volume as the concern. If the sharing is valid and they're a valid law enforcement agency that is backgrounding their employees and playing by the right rules, the more broadly we're sharing, the more appropriate.

[31] He added that he was happy to take guidance & direction from the council on that question.[32] He also described the limits of his authority over those agencies:

if there's misuse outside of our department, full disclosure, I do have very limited control over that beyond auditing and catching it in the first place and reporting it if I see it

[33]

Two of those partners turned out to be federal. Johansen confirmed it at that same meeting, after the fact & after it was already public:

there was some recent information out in the public about us sharing with two federal agencies and this is true. This did happen.

[34]

The requests reached the civilian operator from the United States Postal Inspector's office & from a military base police department, & were approved because neither read as obviously federal the way the FBI, CIA, or ICE would.[25] The monthly share report caught them: the federal category suddenly said two instead of zero.[35] Johansen cancelled both & has since worked with the vendor to block federal entities from requesting Apex data at all.[35] He apologized for the transgression at the same meeting, while arguing that the systems in place had worked.[36]

That disclosure established that two assurances given to residents did not hold. The department's own written narrative for the June 9 meeting told the council that APD prohibits federal data sharing.[11] At the January 29, 2026 work session, in the remarks that set out who can approve a share, Johansen said:

So what we do is that we only share with local police departments who we know are engaged in the same business we are. We do not share with federal entities, hard stop. We don't, we don't share our data with the FBI, we don't share our data with DHS, we don't share data with ICE. We don't, we just don't do it.

[37][3]

The cover sheet for Chief Ryan Johansen's June 9, 2026 presentation tells the council that images are retained for only 30 days and that the department prohibits federal data sharing and maintains ongoing internal audits.[11]

Resident George Hogan quoted the line back to the council at the May 28, 2026 public forum:

It was only four months ago in these chambers that the chief told the Council on data sharing, quote, "No federal entities. Hard stop." The public records say otherwise. In March, Apex's Flock system was sharing data with 994 agencies, 808 out of state and two federal.

[18]

The statute does not bar federal sharing.[17] The failure is narrower & harder to fix by statute: a control the department described to residents as absolute turned out to be one civilian's judgment about whether a requesting agency looked federal, with a monthly report as the backstop.[25][35] The audit worked. It worked up to a month late.[35] That is what an absolute becomes at scale, & the chief has already described the scale: over a thousand partner agencies, & very limited control over misuse outside his own department.[30][33]

Set side by side, what the department told the council & what the record shows line up like this.

What the Apex Police Department told the council, & what the town's own record shows
Told to the council Date What the record shows Date
Only the captain in charge of the Flock program can approve outside access, so there's no way that any employee can say I'm going to approve[24] January 29, 2026 The two federal requests came into our civilian operator & they approved them[25][26] June 9, 2026
We do not share with federal entities, hard stop[37] January 29, 2026 Two federal agencies had access, which the chief confirmed, this is true. This did happen, & apologized for[34][36] June 9, 2026
The agenda packet: the department prohibits federal data sharing & its reporting shows zero instances of misuse, unauthorized searches[11] June 9, 2026 The chief's own account of the two approved federal shares, at the same meeting[34] June 9, 2026
The agenda packet: the ALPR program is already reducing crime[11] June 9, 2026 The chief, speaking: whether it will do that long term, of course, remains to be seen[38] June 9, 2026
Partner agencies must sign agreements binding them to Apex's policies[28] January 29, 2026 There's not a lot of teeth behind that, to be perfectly honest ... Not sure there will be any consequences if they didn't[28] January 29, 2026

Every entry in both columns comes from the town's own meeting record.

60,000 plate reads a day and 1,700 hot list hits

[edit | edit source]

The council had calendared this review once already. On April 14, 2026 the mayor told the council that town staff had asked to pull Presentation #5: Automated License Plate Reader (LPR) Program Update from that night's agenda, & the council set the agenda without it on a unanimous 5-0 vote that also removed an unrelated consent item; the minutes mark the slot ITEM REMOVED ... per Council vote.[18] The review reached the council eight weeks later, as item PR4 on the June 9, 2026 agenda, an ALPR program review by Chief of Police Ryan Johansen.[11]

The written narrative the department filed with the agenda packet made its case before he spoke:

Images are retained for only 30 days, well below the state's 90-day allowance, and are searchable solely for legitimate investigative purposes. APD strictly controls access, requires documented case numbers and justification for every search, prohibits federal data sharing, and maintains ongoing internal audits to ensure compliance.

[11]

Apex records about 60,000 vehicle reads per day on average, which Johansen said had produced over 1,700 official hot list hits.[1] Johansen described those hits as a stolen car, a vehicle known to be involved in criminal activity, or a vehicle involved with a missing person passing one of the cameras.[2] The misread rate on that daily volume vacillates between three and five percent.[39] He set the hit count against the size of the network: 1,700 alerts in six months from vehicles passing one of only seven cameras.[2] He does not publish where those cameras are, telling the council he withholds the locations for what he would think are obvious reasons, though people had posted them on social media anyway.[40]

The breakdown as of April 2026, roughly four to five months of data, was 1100 protection order hits[41] plus 111 stolen vehicle hits, 40 criminal warrant hits, 28 sex offender violation hits, & three missing person hits.[42] The packet's written version of the same tally adds 300 stolen license plates.[11]

The presentation slide filed with the council agenda packet reports an average of about 60,000 vehicle reads per day and over 1,700 official hot list hits, including 1,100 protection orders, as of April 2026.[11]

Case examples followed, & most closed the same way: the suspects were not from Apex.[43] One of them, a crew tied to residential & vehicle break-ins in the Pittsboro area in which firearms were stolen, was picked up by plate readers headed eastbound on 64 & flagged again when the vehicle reached Apex.[44] Johansen noted that the case predated Pittsboro's decision to end its program, adding that it Would probably not occur today.[44]

The surveillance side of this program is counted precisely. The benefit reached the council twice in one hour, in two versions that do not match. The packet's closing slide states that the ALPR program is already reducing crime.[11] Johansen, speaking, called the system an invaluable tool for keeping residents safe & reducing crime rates, then said that whether it will do that long term, of course, remains to be seen.[38] A town photographing 60,000 plates a day is owed more than that.[1][38]

Resident objections and redacted search reasons

[edit | edit source]

George Hogan's stated goal, as INDY Week described it, is to stop Apex from renewing the Flock contract.[3] He is arguing proportion, one of the standard objections to Flock deployments, & he put it to the paper this way:

We don't have the volume of crime that warrants a surveillance system that observes everyone, anywhere, at any time.

[3]

The record a resident would need to test that against is not available to them. INDY Week reported that Apex police ran thousands of Flock searches between August 2025 & March 2026 with the search reason redacted in every entry, from logs obtained by the watchdog site Have I Been Flocked.[3] Nearby Cary supplies the contrast: about 3,200 searches in a little more than a year, roughly 39 percent connected to a specific case number, & another 58 percent carrying no note about why the search was run.[3]

Apex tells the council its own numbers are clean. The June 2026 packet says the department's reporting framework shows zero instances of misuse, unauthorized searches, or any searches related to immigration or abortion enforcement.[11] A search log that redacts every reason is entirely consistent with an internal audit that finds nothing wrong, because the redaction removes the field a member of the public would need to test the audit against.

Private systems sit alongside the town's rather than inside it. Johansen told the January 29, 2026 work session that a business can choose to have Apex notified when a stolen car enters its lot, using Lowe's as the example, while Apex does not see that business's data.[18] He also said there are no Flock cameras in neighborhoods & never will be, & that installing them privately would be up to homeowners associations.[18] The Peak Weekly reported cameras spotted around Beaver Creek & specifically the Lowe's Home Improvement parking lot.[12]

Public Safety Committee referral and an unsigned 10-camera expansion

[edit | edit source]

On June 9, 2026 the council moved to refer further ALPR policy development & updates to the Public Safety Committee[8][45], & it carried unanimously.[46] That is the remedy currently on offer, & the committee cannot decide anything. When the council adopted its committee structure on March 25, 2025, tying it to the December 3, 2025 organizational meeting, the minutes record Town Clerk Allen Coleman describing the committees as policy review and decision discussion bodies that do not have the authority to take binding action on behalf of the Council.[6]

The expansion was already drafted when that motion passed. The council was told at that meeting that the current contract ends in January, that 10 additional cameras were budgeted for the fiscal year, & that the contract for them had arrived from the vendor but was not being signed because of the ongoing discussion.[10] Holding an expansion contract unsigned until a policy exists is the sequence Section 20-183.31(a) asked for in the first place.[7]

Mahaffey, who moved the 2023 consent agenda as a councilmember & is now the town's mayor pro tempore[5][18], wrote up the referral in his own newsletter ten days later, listing data retention, outside-agency access, auditability, & how much control a private vendor should have over public safety infrastructure as the open questions.[45] He drew one line about how any policy should be written:

I do not think Apex should simply rely on default settings, standard vendor assurances, or policies written for convenience rather than public accountability.

[45]

That is the correct instinct, arriving nearly three years after the first vote & seven months before the contract expires.[5][9]

[edit | edit source]

The next regular council meeting is scheduled for August 11, 2026, & its agenda carries no plate reader item.[4] Three of the police department's items on that consent agenda are technology contracts, each filed by Deputy Chief Trevor Materasso.[4] Consent item CN4 would amend the town's agreement with Axon Enterprise, Inc. through June 30, 2030, adding Axon Air DroneSense software & an Axon Interview Room System.[4] CN8 would approve a LeadsOnline, LLC subscription to the PowerPlus Investigations Systems through June 30, 2029.[4] CN12 is a ratification rather than an approval, a motion to confirm an oral agreement with CentralSquare Technologies, LLC for CAD-to-CAD Unify (Cloud) software.[4]

Apex consent items are enacted by one motion with the adoption of the Consent Agenda, and without discussion, and the block includes CN4 for Axon drone and interview room camera systems through June 30, 2030, CN8 for a LeadsOnline investigation system, and CN12 ratifying a CentralSquare Technologies agreement.[47]

Consent item CN21 would approve the June 9, 2026 minutes, the town's official record of the ALPR presentation.[4] Residents who want to speak first get three minutes each, & large groups are asked to select one representative for the whole group.[4]

The mechanism that installed the plate readers is still the default setting. Three police technology contracts, one of them running to June 30, 2030, are scheduled to be adopted in a single motion without discussion unless somebody pulls one out of the block first.[4] The last time that happened at an Apex meeting where Flock was on the list, the item pulled out was an encroachment agreement.[5][6]

See also

[edit | edit source]

References

[edit | edit source]
  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Daily read volume and hot list hit total, beginning at 37:07.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Hits over six months against seven cameras, beginning at 37:41.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Gallup, Jasmine (2026-04-27). "What the Flock?: An Explainer on the Controversial License Plate Reading Cameras Deployed Across the Triangle". INDY Week. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  4. ↑ 4.00 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 "Regular Town Council Meeting Agenda, August 11, 2026". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-08-11. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Full agenda text. The town also posts an abbreviated agenda as a PDF carrying item titles only, at https://mccmeetings.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/apexnc-pubu/MEET-Agenda-409eaaf1082e4bfb90281326cc4ec0b3.pdf ; the two versions differ on item wording throughout & on the CN12 term date, which the full agenda gives as June 11, 2027 & the abbreviated agenda gives as June 30, 2027.
  5. ↑ 5.00 5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04 5.05 5.06 5.07 5.08 5.09 5.10 5.11 "2023 Approved Council Meeting Minutes, Combined". Town of Apex, North Carolina. Retrieved 2026-08-10. March 21, 2023 work session at combined page 289; June 27, 2023 consent agenda vote and item CN4 at combined pages 497 to 498.
  6. ↑ 6.00 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 "Combined 2025 Meeting Minutes, Approved". Town of Apex, North Carolina. Retrieved 2026-08-10. January 14, 2025 regular meeting at combined pages 2 to 3; March 25, 2025 committee structure item NB1 at combined pages 211 to 213.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 "N.C.G.S. 20-183.31, Regulation of use". North Carolina General Assembly. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Motion to refer ALPR policy to the Public Safety Committee, beginning at 1:20:04.
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 "Agenda Item Cover Sheet, CN8, Flock Group Inc. License Plate Reader Order Form and Master Services Agreement" (PDF). Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2025-01-14. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Contract end date and the unsigned 10-camera expansion, beginning at 1:22:33.
  11. ↑ 11.00 11.01 11.02 11.03 11.04 11.05 11.06 11.07 11.08 11.09 11.10 11.11 "Regular Town Council Meeting Agenda Packet, June 9, 2026" (PDF). Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Item PR4 listing at packet page 4; Apex Police Department narrative at packet pages 172 to 173; presentation slides at packet pages 195 to 204.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 Whitaker, Adam (2025-12-25). "Tinkle Bells and Flock Cameras". The Peak Weekly. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  13. ↑ "Combined 2025 Meeting Minutes, Approved". Town of Apex, North Carolina. Retrieved 2026-08-10. January 14, 2025 regular meeting at combined page 2.
  14. ↑ "N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 20-183.33, Penalty for violation". North Carolina General Assembly. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  15. ↑ "Article 3D, Automatic License Plate Reader Systems". North Carolina General Assembly. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Full Article text: Sections 20-183.30, 20-183.31, 20-183.32, 20-183.32A (repealed effective January 1, 2024) & 20-183.33.
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 "2026.01.29 Town Council Work Session". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-01-29. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Auditing of the system, beginning at 3:08:39.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 "N.C.G.S. 20-183.32, Preservation and disclosure of records". North Carolina General Assembly. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 "Combined 2026 Meeting Minutes, Approved, January through May 2026". Town of Apex, North Carolina. Retrieved 2026-08-10. January 29, 2026 work session at combined pages 81 to 86; May 28, 2026 public forum at combined page 574.
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 "Exhibit A, Order Form, Flock Safety and NC Apex PD" (PDF). Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2025-01-14. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Camera composition, beginning at 36:38.
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 21.4 "Master Services Agreement between Flock Group, Inc. and Town of Apex" (PDF). Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2025-01-14. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  22. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Scope of outbound sharing, beginning at 23:54.
  23. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Entries required of outside searchers, beginning at 24:09.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 "2026.01.29 Town Council Work Session". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-01-29. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Who may approve an outside agency's access, beginning at 3:05:50.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Origin of the two federal requests, beginning at 26:26.
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Approval of the two federal requests, beginning at 26:40.
  27. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Single point of contact for share approvals and its oversight, beginning at 25:02.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 28.2 28.3 "2026.01.29 Town Council Work Session". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-01-29. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Conditions attached to a sharing approval, beginning at 3:06:14.
  29. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Response that the earlier remark was re-quoted out of context, beginning at 24:21.
  30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Number of partner agencies, beginning at 25:53.
  31. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Position on sharing volume, beginning at 25:58.
  32. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Offer to take council guidance on sharing volume, beginning at 26:04.
  33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Control over misuse by other agencies, beginning at 24:46.
  34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 34.2 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Confirmation of two federal shares, beginning at 26:18.
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 35.2 35.3 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Monthly share report and cancellation, beginning at 26:48.
  36. ↑ 36.0 36.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Apology for the two federal shares, beginning at 27:19.
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 "2026.01.29 Town Council Work Session". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-01-29. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Scope of sharing and federal entities, beginning at 3:06:25.
  38. ↑ 38.0 38.1 38.2 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Closing remarks on crime rates, beginning at 54:26.
  39. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Misread percentage, beginning at 37:30.
  40. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Camera locations withheld, beginning at 36:58.
  41. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Protection order hits, beginning at 38:14.
  42. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Hit breakdown as of April 2026, beginning at 39:01.
  43. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Case examples and the recurring note that suspects were not from Apex, beginning at 41:59.
  44. ↑ 44.0 44.1 "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Pittsboro burglary case, beginning at 42:20.
  45. ↑ 45.0 45.1 45.2 Mahaffey, Terry (2026-06-19). "APEX UPDATES: Budget, Flock, CSX, Parades". Terry Mahaffey, Apex Town Council. Retrieved 2026-08-10.
  46. ↑ "2026.06.09 Town Council Meeting - Part 2". Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-06-09. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Unanimous vote on the referral, beginning at 1:23:22.
  47. ↑ "Agenda, Regular Town Council Meeting, August 11, 2026" (PDF). Town of Apex, North Carolina. 2026-08-11. Retrieved 2026-08-10. Abbreviated agenda, consent agenda at pages 2 to 3.
Retrieved from "https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=User:Louis/Apex_license_plate_reader_program&oldid=63506"