Surveillance Without Oversight: Audit of Prescott Police Flock Camera Network Reveals Millions of Searches Lacking Case Numbers and Explanations

An in-depth investigation into the Prescott Police Department’s automated license plate reader (ALPR) network has exposed a significant lack of administrative oversight, tracking gaps, and extensive usage by out-of-state law enforcement agencies.

According to network audit logs obtained from a public records request, nearly half of the 3,830,002 searches run through the department’s Flock Safety network between January 1 and June 30 carried no associated case number. This revelation comes amid a growing wave of skepticism and contract cancellations across Arizona, driven by high-profile instances of officer misconduct and concerns over civil liberties.

Main Facts: The Scale of the Surveillance Network

The Prescott Police Department operates a network of Flock Safety ALPR cameras, which capture high-resolution photographs of every passing vehicle, cataloging license plates along with distinct vehicle features. However, audit logs reveal that the accountability mechanisms designed to prevent the misuse of this technology are frequently bypassed or left incomplete.

The core findings of the audit include:

• Missing Case Numbers: Out of more than 3.8 million searches conducted on the Prescott network during the first half of the year, nearly 50% lacked an associated case number. While Prescott PD’s internal searches show a case number 100% of the time in public logs, these numbers are heavily redacted (displayed only as asterisks). An unredacted internal log consisting of 8,778 searches revealed that 101 queries had no legitimate case number, relying instead on placeholders like "investigation," "training," "test," "demo," or "UNK" (unknown).
• Heavy Out-of-State Traffic: External, out-of-state law enforcement agencies accounted for 35.9% of all searches run through Prescott’s network, totaling 1,376,301 queries. The top searchers included the Dallas Police Department, the California Highway Patrol, and the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office.
• Incomplete Search Justifications: Flock Safety’s interface requires users to select a search reason from a dropdown menu and type a brief explanation. While only 32 of the 3.83 million searches left the dropdown category blank, more than one million searches (1,000,738) featured no written explanation whatsoever, rendering the true motivation behind those searches impossible to verify.
• A Growing Backlash: Amid mounting evidence of system misuse—including officers using the network to stalk family members—multiple Arizona municipalities, including Tempe, Chandler, Surprise, Cave Creek, and the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office, have terminated their contracts with Flock Safety.

Chronology of the ALPR Controversy in Arizona

The rapid adoption and subsequent scrutiny of Flock Safety’s technology in Arizona has unfolded over a condensed timeline, marked by public records disclosures, internal investigations, and sudden policy reversals:

• January 1 – June 30: The Prescott Police Department’s Flock Safety network logs 3,830,002 searches, establishing a massive footprint of vehicle surveillance in Yavapai County.
• July 17: A public records request is submitted to the Cottonwood Police Department seeking its Flock network audit logs.
• August 7: The City of Chandler abruptly terminates its contract with Flock Safety after a routine internal audit detects unauthorized activity.
• August 13: A Chandler police officer resigns following disclosures that he used the Flock system to illegally track a family member. On the same day, facing national scrutiny over data security and privacy, Flock Safety announces sweeping system changes, including reducing its default data retention period from 30 days to seven days and introducing a new "Evidence Mode."
• August 19: Public records requests filed by journalists yield the Prescott Police Department’s internal audit logs, exposing the scale of unverified searches and out-of-state access.
• August 20: Arizona’s Family Investigates reports that a former Apache Junction police officer resigned after admitting to using Flock technology to track his wife. Two telecommunications officers who assisted him face disciplinary action. Simultaneously, the Arizona Daily Sun publishes an editorial criticizing the "functionally meaningless" documentation practices of officers utilizing the Coconino County Sheriff’s Office (CCSO) Flock network.
• August 26: The City of Tempe officially cancels its contract with Flock Safety and deactivates its camera network, citing nationwide concerns regarding technology misuse.
• August 28: The Cottonwood Police Department misses its deadline to turn over its Flock audit logs, more than a month after the initial public records request was filed.

Supporting Data: Network Usage Breakdown

The audit logs paint a detailed picture of how local, county, and national law enforcement agencies utilize Prescott’s surveillance database.

Prescott Police Department Internal Searches

According to Prescott PD’s unredacted internal logs, the department conducted 8,778 searches. The queries were categorized under various offenses, with narcotics investigations leading by a wide margin:

Other searches included stolen property (154), child abuse (117), sex offenses (111), vandalism (100), robbery (77), trespass (65), weapons offenses (37), kidnapping (34), terroristic threats (19), arson (14), stalking (12), and prostitution (6). Notably, human trafficking was cited only five times, all tied to a single case number in January.

Out-of-State Agency Activity

A total of 594 agencies accessed Prescott’s network. While this is a smaller pool of agencies compared to the 3,815 that searched Coconino County’s network, the volume of searches on Prescott’s system was significantly higher. The top three out-of-state searchers accounted for over 785,000 queries:

1. Dallas Police Department (Texas): 306,876 searches
2. California Highway Patrol (California): 265,802 searches
3. Riverside County Sheriff’s Office (California): 212,490 searches

Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office (YCSO)

YCSO conducted 271 searches of the Prescott PD network. Of these, 182 searches carried a case number, while 89 (32.8%) did not. Furthermore, 92 searches contained no written explanation.

The primary reasons cited for YCSO searches were burglary (81), missing persons (28), stolen property (19), financial crime (19), narcotics (18), sex offenses (18), homicide (15), and arson (13). YCSO recorded zero searches related to human trafficking.

Cottonwood Police Department & Camp Verde Marshal’s Office

The Cottonwood Police Department (CPD) ran 624 searches on Prescott’s network. CPD’s data showed a significant lack of documentation: 352 searches (56.4%) left the case number field blank, and 345 searches (55.3%) had no written explanation.

Domestic assault was the most frequent search reason for CPD with 116 queries, followed by traffic infractions (78), narcotics (61), vehicle theft (46), missing persons (42), and welfare checks (38). CPD ran zero searches related to human trafficking.

The Camp Verde Marshal’s Office (CVMO) was linked to 26 searches on the Prescott network. These searches were executed on their behalf by the Cottonwood PD (20 searches) and Prescott PD (6 searches). Twelve of these 26 searches lacked a case number.

Partners Against Narcotics Trafficking (PANT)

PANT, a multi-agency task force operating in Yavapai County, was cited in 287 searches, all executed through Prescott PD. In contrast to other departments, PANT maintained strict documentation standards: 100% of their searches included both a case number and a written explanation.

Narcotics investigations accounted for 243 of these searches, with homicide or death investigations accounting for 22, and another 22 logged under the custom text "PANT drug suspect." These searches were highly concentrated in January, which saw 159 of the task force’s 287 total queries.

Official Responses and Actions

The revelations of unmonitored searches and system misuse have triggered swift administrative actions and defensive maneuvers from local governments and Flock Safety.

Municipal Cancellations

In announcing the termination of its contract on August 26, the City of Tempe released a statement acknowledging both the utility and the inherent risks of the technology:

"While the cameras have helped Tempe Police solve crimes, recent misuse of automated license plate reader systems in Arizona and nationwide has raised concerns about the risks that come with the technology."

Tempe officials clarified that while they had not detected any internal misuse within their own department, the broader landscape of security failures prompted the shutdown.

Similarly, the City of Chandler acted quickly following its audit, terminating its program on August 7 after identifying "an anomaly in the use of the Flock system that could not be explained through standard police action." This anomaly was later revealed to be an officer using the system for personal surveillance.

Flock Safety’s Policy Pivot

In response to growing public relations challenges and a wave of contract cancellations, Flock Safety announced major product and policy updates on August 13. The company introduced "Evidence Mode" to address long-term investigations while shortening its default data retention settings. In a statement, the company noted:

"Our analysis shows that more than 90% of searches without a full plate are done within a week. Evidence Mode… addresses the exceptional cases that take longer: Detectives can preserve specific ALPR data as evidence for an active investigation in cold storage, consistent with existing laws and policies."

Missing Logs and Silence

Despite the push for transparency, some local departments have resisted prompt disclosure. The Cottonwood Police Department failed to produce its Flock network audit logs by the late August deadline, despite a public records request submitted on July 17. Additionally, Flock Safety did not respond to inquiries regarding the Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office’s extensive use of its network.

Implications: The Balance of Public Safety and Civil Liberties

The findings from the Prescott Police Department’s audit logs highlight a growing tension in modern policing: the balance between advanced surveillance capabilities and constitutional privacy protections.

The Illusion of Audit Trails

While proponents of ALPR technology argue that audit logs provide an immutable record of officer activity that prevents abuse, the Prescott data shows that these logs can be easily bypassed. When officers can input terms like "Other Investigation," "PANT drug suspect," or simply "Investigation" without an accompanying case number, the audit trail becomes functionally useless. Without a verifiable case number, independent oversight bodies and defense attorneys cannot verify whether a search was legally justified or constitutes an unauthorized invasion of privacy.

The Problem of "Surveillance Sprawl"

The high volume of out-of-state searches highlights the borderless nature of private surveillance networks. A vehicle passing through a small municipality like Prescott, Arizona, can be tracked and cataloged by law enforcement officers in Dallas, Texas, or Riverside, California, often without the vehicle owner’s knowledge or any local criminal connection. This interconnected database effectively creates a national surveillance network managed by a private corporation, largely bypassing traditional state-level privacy protections and judicial warrants.

As more Arizona cities opt out of the Flock Safety network, the future of automated license plate readers in the state remains uncertain. The conflict between local law enforcement’s desire for high-tech investigative tools and the public’s demand for strict privacy safeguards and transparent oversight continues to intensify.