Continuously serving Kosciusko County since 1854
More than 30 Flock cameras are located around Kosciusko County.
Ten have been damaged over an unspecified amount of time.
After a local media source asked some questions recently about the use of Flock cameras in the community, those questions ended up at Warsaw Mayor Jeff Grose’s desk. He, with the leadership team at the Warsaw Police Department (WPD), provided a formal response to the inquiry this week to local media.
The 20-page response included a press release, about three pages of answers to 18 questions, a list of legal decisions on automated license plate readers (ALPR), six examples of cases where local investigations were assisted by ALPRs, statistics from the WPD showing ALPR success stories, a copy of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between Flock Group Inc. and the WPD, WPD’s Policy 426 regarding the guidelines and expectations for the ALPRs; an email from Garrett Langley at Flock regarding privacy, accountability and security; a proposal from the Indiana Association of Chiefs of Police regarding proposed statewide standards for ALPRs; and frequently asked questions.
Flock cameras and their potential abuse and invasion of privacy rights have become a national topic over at least the past year. The Kosciusko County Council will discuss and hear comments from the public on Flock cameras at their 6 p.m. Sept. 10 meeting after several council members brought up the cameras during budget discussions.
Press Release
In the release from Grose, he says in fall 2023 he was formally updated and briefed on the use of Flock cameras in the city and county by the WPD leadership team.
“The Kosciusko County Flock Committee’s efforts to offer this technology to area law enforcement agencies provides their trained, approved and closely monitored officers with another valuable tool to make our community a safer place to live, work, and play. This committee must continue to demand that the use of Flock cameras in our county be done so responsibly, transparently and within the law to ensure that public safety and individual rights work together – rather than competing with one another,” Grose says.
“As an elected official for the city of Warsaw, I have supported the responsible use of Flock Safety cameras as a valuable tool for our WPD law enforcement officers. This program’s governing body, the Kosciusko County Flock Committee, is chaired by the County Prosecutor’s Office – who oversees the program’s overall policies and operations for the entire county. Our elected county council, county commissioners, city council and town boards will continue to influence the funding and support to use these cameras throughout the county. The state and federal courts, along with our state legislators, will also determine the appropriate use of this law enforcement tool in our county, state and country. Our belief in the principles of separation of powers and checks & balances in our federal system of government is certainly at work related to the specific use of this law enforcement tool,” he says.
Regarding the formal responses to questions recently asked by a local media outlet about the use of Flock cameras in the community, Grose says several members of the Kosciusko County Flock Committee, along with the city attorney, have reviewed and concurred with the formal responses. Those members of the committee are listed as Kosciusko County Prosecutor Brad Voelz, Sheriff Jim Smith, WPD Chief Scott Whitaker and city attorney Scott Reust.
Grose’s release states they encourage any person who has questions or concerns about Flock technology and the use of it in the community to contact the Flock Committee’s public relations representative at 574-372-9515.
Questions & Answers
Some of the answers provided from the WPD through Grose to the questions are a little longer than others. Where possible, redundant answers may have been edited due to space considerations, without changing the answers provided.
1. How has the Flock system assisted law enforcement in protecting and serving the citizens of Kosciusko County?
The Flock system has proven to be a valuable public-safety tool for law enforcement throughout Kosciusko County. This technology has assisted officers in locating missing children and wanted individuals, recovering stolen vehicles and equipment taken from local businesses, investigating property damage and developing leads in serious incidents, including cases involving shots fired.
Numerous arrests and successful case resolutions have been directly aided by information obtained through the Flock system. These results demonstrate the value of having this technology available in our communities. The Flock system provides law enforcement with another effective investigative resource that can help officers respond more quickly, identify potential suspects or vehicles, recover stolen property and ultimately better protect and serve the citizens of Kosciusko County.
2. Are all local agencies represented?
All local agencies were informed of Flock technology during the development of the program. The Kosciusko County Flock Committee currently includes representatives from the Warsaw Police Department, Kosciusko County Sheriff’s Office, Silver Lake Police Department, Tippecanoe Township Trustee’s Office, Winona Lake Police Department and the Kosciusko County Prosecutor’s Office. The committee meets annually and on an as needed basis. Each participating agency must agree and follow the security protocols set forth in the Flock (MOU). All sworn and trained law enforcement officers within our county’s jurisdiction are eligible to access the system, even if their department is not contributing toward the purchase of Flock cameras in our county.
3. What are your thoughts on the growing public concern about ALPR technology?
We understand that people have questions and concerns about privacy, access, retention, case law and how this technology is used. Each camera is configured to record only the license plate and rear of a vehicle moving in one direction at a specific location and time on a public roadway; it does not continuously follow a vehicle in the manner of a GPS device. It is not configured to record faces or biometric information. It cannot identify a vehicle owner – a vehicle registration may only be accessed via separate secure databases. Police cannot stop vehicles on the basis of an ALPR alert alone. All alerts must be independently verified before taking enforcement action. This is why appropriate policies, authorized-use requirements, auditing and oversight have been implemented. As technology and the program have evolved, we have continued to review and strengthen safeguards to prevent and identify misuse.
4. Have there been formal complaints from the public?
No formal complaints from the public have been presented during a city, town or county council meeting. To date, several informal concerns and questions have been addressed by different local agencies on a citizen-by-citizen basis. As indicated earlier, we encourage any person who has questions or concerns about the use of Flock technology in our community to contact the Flock Committee’s public relations representative at 574-372-9515.
5. Has there been an effort by the Kosciusko County Flock Committee to address concerns?
The Kosciusko County Flock Committee meets on a regular basis. In addition to reviewing the productivity of current camera placement, the committee also monitors and reviews current case law, policies, safeguards and any concerns raised by members of our community. The committee reflected on several recent federal and state court cases which have reviewed the use of ALPR technology and the specific facts presented in each case. Courts have consistently upheld ALPR technology when used with appropriate legal safeguards, policies and oversight. The committee also is working with Indiana legislators to address clear legislative standards governing this technology and have assisted with potential legislation.
The committee also addressed recent incidents involving damage and tampering with our cameras. Since the inception, members of the Flock Committee have also met periodically with state and local elected officials who are interested in learning about the system, its capabilities and costs.
6. Has a County Flock Committee been used since the program began?
Oversight was more informal when the program first began. As the program expanded, the committee became more formal and included additional law enforcement and government agencies.
7. Are any changes in policy being considered?
The Flock Committee is implementing a requirement that all law enforcement agencies and government participating agencies wishing to access the cameras within our county must have a policy governing authorized use, access and accountability. Failure to acknowledge these policy standards would disqualify an entity from having access to our ALPR cameras.
8. When did the local Flock program begin?
Local discussions with Flock began around December 2020, when the technology was presented to the Kosciusko County Prosecutor’s Office and the county chiefs meeting. In January 2021, the Prosecutor’s Office entered a one-year, $11,000 agreement for four cameras. The Winona Lake Police Department already had two cameras, which were later incorporated into the Prosecutor’s Office program in February 2022, bringing the total to six.
Each participating agency must agree and follow the security protocols set forth in the Flock MOU. As the program developed, additional cameras were added. A five-year agreement began in January 2024, and two additional portable cameras were purchased in January 2026.
9. How many ALPR devices are currently in Kosciusko County?
Our local government program currently includes 30 standard cameras, two portable cameras and one Condor camera (intersection camera). In addition, local businesses have three privately owned cameras within our county. The privately owned cameras are separate from the government-owned device count.
10. How are camera locations selected?
The program initially focused on higher-traffic routes entering the county. As the system developed, locations were evaluated to provide useful coverage of routes entering and leaving key areas on our 1,000-plus miles of roadway within Kosciusko County. Some cameras have moved to other public roadways as needs and circumstances have changed.
11. Are more cameras being added?
The program is reviewed periodically. The committee evaluates the system for possible additions, relocations, reductions or other changes based on public-safety needs, program performance, policy considerations and available resources.
12. What is the approximate cost per device and how long is the current contract?
The current lease and use of the software is approximately $2,500 per ALPR device and $3,000 for the Condor (intersection camera) each year. The current agreement is a five-year contract that began in January 2024. This five-year contract provides camera maintenance and protects the cost(s) from rising until 2030.
In partnership with the county, the WPD has paid to the Kosciusko County Prosecutor’s Office: $10,000 in 2023; $25,000 in 2024; $30,000 in 2025 and 2026. The fund used to pay for the 12 cameras the city is responsible for is account 1101-006-310.000 (professional services).
The city’s funds for their 12 cameras are budgeted tax dollars, according to the mayor's office.
13. Has there been vandalism or tampering with devices locally?
Yes. To date, we have had 10 cameras damaged in our area. Damage or destruction of another person’s property is illegal. The Flock Committee will work with the Prosecutor’s Office to actively pursue those who have intentionally damaged the cameras and/or equipment.
14. Have there been any local instances of misuse?
The Flock Committee has established auditing procedures which monitor any misuse of the Flock system by local law enforcement and government participating agencies.
Several years ago, during the introduction and use of our Flock system by the participating agencies, one instance of misuse was identified and quickly addressed. As with any tool used by law enforcement, having clear policies, effective auditing oversight and providing adequate training is a high priority. All trained and authorized Flock users are accountable for their search history and use of the system.
15. Do the devices use artificial intelligence?
We would encourage you to refer to Flock’s product description via their website to inquire about the products specifically. We do use an AI-assisted audit tool within their system that is designed to identify patterns that may indicate possible misuse. ALPR technology is not mass surveillance. It is a policy-controlled investigative tool governed by retention limits, auditing, authorized uses, and accountability.
16. What are your thoughts on the protests happening locally?
The public always has the right to peacefully express their opinions. No member of the Kosciusko County Flock Committee has been invited to attend and address questions from anyone organizing these protests or gatherings. We encourage everyone involved to be informed and remain peaceful.
17. Are there data retention limits?
We are aware of Flock's recent release regarding their seven-day data retention policy. Our current data retention is 30 days, and we will be reviewing this with the committee. Additionally, please note that to perform a license plate search as of today, "Offense Type," "Case Number" (CAD Event), and "Reason" are all required fields. Law enforcement agencies retain ownership and control of all ALPR data stored within the Flock system and vendors are not permitted to own or sell that information.
18. Does the Kosciusko County Flock Committee support statewide standards recommended by the Indiana Association of Chiefs of Police?
Yes.
Impact, Policy 426, Standards
According to a WPD’s ALPR success snapshot through Aug. 5, 2026, there have been 523 documented outcomes; 218 stops made; 133 arrests; 292 case clearances; nine vehicles recovered; three guns recovered and $35,902 in recovered value.
Stops made represents law enforcement stops that began with a Flock alert, the mayor's office clarified. However the police can not stop vehicles based on an ALPR alert alone. All alerts must be independently verified using other law enforcement tools and observations before enforcement action is taken.
Policy 426 covers ALPRs in the WPD policy manual.
The purpose the policy is “to provide guidance for the capture, storage and use of digital data obtained through the use of” ALPR technology, it states.
The policy of the WPD is to “utilize ALPR technology to capture digital license plate data and images, which are securely hosted via a cloud service provider, while recognizing the established privacy rights of the public. All images from the provider must follow the digital evidence procedure set forth by the department’s established protocol.” The policy also states all data and images gathered by the ALPR are for the official use of the WPD and, because such data may contain confidential information, it is not open for public review.”
Policy 426 also addresses the installation and maintenance of the ALPR equipment, ALPR data retention and access and day-to-day operations of the ALPR equipment and data.
Use of an ALPR is restricted to six purposes outlined in Policy 426. An ALPR “shall” only be used for official law enforcement business. No member of the WPD shall operate ALPR equipment or access ALPR data without first completing department-approved training. No ALPR operator may access confidential department, state or federal data unless authorized to do so. If practicable, the officer should very an ALPR response through the appropriate official law enforcement database before taking enforcement action that is based solely on an ALPR alert, according to Policy 426. An ALPR may be used in conjunction with patrol operations or criminal investigations. While an ALPR may be used to canvass license plates around any crime scene, particular consideration should be given to using ALPR-equipped vehicles to canvass areas around homicides, shootings and other major incidents.
Policy 426 also addresses accountability and releasing ALPR data to only other law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes or as otherwise permitted by law. There is a three-step procedure in place for other agencies to request the ALPR data.
According to the Indiana Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), Indiana law enforcement agencies increasingly use ALPR technology as an investigative tool. While many agencies have adopted internal policies governing its use, Indiana has not established a consistent statewide statutory framework addressing privacy, data retention, transparency, accountability and oversight.
The IACP recommends the adoption of uniform statewide standards governing the responsible use of ALPR technology to protect both public safety and Hoosiers’ privacy.
IACP’s recommended statewide standards covers data retention, human verification, access, audit trails, authorized uses, data ownership and written policies. The standards would prohibit keeping routine data indefinitely, stopping someone based only on an ALPR alert, anonymous or unauthorized access, untracked searches or access, personal use or monitoring lawful First Amendment activity, vendors selling data or creating a statewide surveillance database and operating ALPR without written rules or oversight.
