Skip to content
ORWELL INDEX
Active Updated

Richmond Police | License plate readers

Richmond's police chief took the plate readers offline in November 2025 after learning a Flock setting had made the city's data searchable nationwide. The council voted 4-3 in March 2026 to turn them back on through the end of the year. The city publishes monthly statistics throughout.

At a glance

System status
Back online. The council voted 4-3 on 17 March 2026 to extend the contract to 31 December 2026, after the chief took the readers offline in November 2025 [7] [8]
Why it was taken offline
The chief said a Flock "national search" setting had made the city's data searchable by outside agencies holding a complete plate number. The department said in a press release that there is no evidence any outside agency accessed or misused the data [7]
How long the setting was on
From when the cameras came online in early 2023 until February 2025, according to the chief [8]
Contract
About $1 million a year from 2023, expanded by a further $1 million in January 2025 to add drones and gunshot and tire-screech detection, on a 4-3 council vote [7] [8]
Retention
No longer than thirty days on the department server; the vendor purges at the end of thirty days [2]
Federal immigration enforcement
Sharing not permitted, naming ICE and Customs and Border Patrol [2]
What a requesting agency must sign
An acknowledgment that the data will not be used for federal immigration enforcement [2]
Query logging
Every inquiry must carry a case or incident number and a reason [2]
Audit
Annual, by the Office of Professional Accountability, on at least ten inquiries drawn at random from the preceding six months [2]
Suspicion needed to run the system
None. The policy says reasonable suspicion or probable cause is not required before using a reader [2]
Hot list reads, 1 Jan to 31 Dec 2024
109,776 as the report prints the total [3]
Hot list reads, 1 Jan to 31 Oct 2025
184,930 as the report prints the total [4]
Arrests recorded with plate reader use, 2024
131, alongside 132 vehicle recoveries and 414 cases assisted [3]
Camera count
not stated in the policy or the monthly reports. The EFF Atlas snapshot in this repo counts 116 Flock cameras as of April 2024 [5]
Whether any outside agency actually took the data
the department said there is no evidence any did. An absence of evidence in a system whose own audit view did not surface the setting is not the same as a finding that none did, and we hold no independent record either way [7]

How it happened

  1. Context

    Atlas snapshot counts 116 Flock cameras

    The EFF Atlas of Surveillance records the department operating 116 Flock Safety license plate readers as of April 2024. [5]

  2. Expansion

    Council expands the Flock contract, 4-3

    Richmondside reports the council adding about $1 million to the roughly $1 million a year contract, bringing in drone technology and gunshot and tire-screech detection. The mayor and two councilmembers voted against, citing the company's ability to comply with the city's sanctuary policy. [7] [8]

  3. Coverage

    Full-year 2024 statistics published

    The department's report for 1 January to 31 December 2024 records 132 vehicle recoveries, 414 cases assisted, 131 arrests and 15 license plate recoveries, and prints a hot list read total of 109,776. [3]

  4. Incident

    The chief takes the readers offline

    Richmondside reports that the incoming chief shut the system down on learning that a Flock "national search" setting had left the city's data searchable by outside agencies with a complete plate number. He is quoted saying "The moment I found out about this issue, I shut it off completely," and that he notified the council immediately. [7]

  5. Coverage

    Statistics through October 2025 published

    The report covering 1 January to 31 October 2025 records 60 vehicle recoveries, 297 cases assisted, 75 arrests and 11 license plate recoveries, and prints a hot list read total of 184,930. [4]

  6. Coverage

    The department discloses the exposure

    The department issued a press release saying there is no evidence any outside agency accessed or misused the city's data, and that "The system will remain offline until verified safeguards are in place to prevent similar issues." The chief told Richmondside the setting was "outside the scope of what we've been telling people and what has been told to us." [7]

  7. Context

    Policy 433 carries a February 2026 stamp

    The manual on the city website carries a Lexipol copyright stamp of February 13, 2026. Policy 433 sets a thirty day retention limit, bars sharing for federal immigration enforcement, and requires a requesting agency to acknowledge in writing that it will not use the data for that purpose. [2]

  8. Decision

    Council votes 4-3 to turn the readers back on

    Richmondside reports the council extending the contract to 31 December 2026, when it is to be re-evaluated. Four councilmembers voted in favour and three, including the mayor, against. The chief told the council that Flock's onboarding had not explained what the national search feature did. [8]

  9. Coverage

    May 2026 statistics published

    The most recent published report is headed for 1 May to 31 May 2026 and records 10 vehicle recoveries, 40 cases assisted, 11 arrests and one license plate recovery, with a hot list read total of 14,771. [6]

What the record establishes

Richmond publishes what most departments do not. The city keeps a plate reader transparency page that links the policy and indexes monthly statistical reports back to 2023.[1] Each report gives arrests made with plate reader help, vehicles and plates recovered, cases assisted, the offences associated with those arrests, and a table of hot list reads.

For the full year 2024 the report records 132 vehicle recoveries, 414 cases assisted, 131 arrests and 15 license plate recoveries.[3] For 1 January to 31 October 2025 it records 60 vehicle recoveries, 297 cases assisted, 75 arrests and 11 plate recoveries.[4] The most recent report, headed for May 2026, records 10 vehicle recoveries, 40 cases assisted, 11 arrests and one plate recovery.[6]

Those figures are the department’s own count of what the system produced. Set against them is the scale of collection: the same reports print hot list read totals of 109,776 for 2024 and 184,930 for the first ten months of 2025.[3][4] A reader can weigh one against the other, which is the point of publishing both.

An arithmetic note

In two of the three reports the categories do not account for the total. The 2024 table lists 92,193 stolen plate reads, 3,311 stolen vehicle reads and 276 felony vehicle reads, which sum to 95,780 against a printed total of 109,776.[3] The 2025 table lists 110,996, 1,723 and 251, which sum to 112,970 against a printed total of 184,930.[4] The May 2026 table lists 14,612, 140 and 19, which sum to 14,771 and match the printed total exactly.[6]

We state the sums and the totals and nothing further. The categories shown do not cover every read in the two earlier reports, and the reason is not in the documents.

The May 2026 report is also headed “DATE: 5/1/26 - 5/31/26” while its section title reads “2026 YEAR-TO-DATE STATISTICS”, and the city indexes it as a year-to-date report.[6] Those disagree about whether the figures cover one month or the year, so we quote the header range and leave the question open.

What the policy says

The manual on the city site carries a Lexipol stamp of 13 February 2026. Policy 433 states that the department “does not permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City or its contractor/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement”, naming ICE and Customs and Border Patrol.[2] The sharing procedure then requires the requesting agency to include “an acknowledgment the information received will not be used for the purpose of federal immigration enforcement”.[2] A written promise from the receiving agency is a stronger control than a statement of intent by the sending one.

Data on the department server is kept “no longer than thirty days (30 days)” and the vendor purges at thirty days.[2] Every inquiry “must be documented by using either a Richmond PD case number or an incident number and a reason for the inquiry”, and the Office of Professional Accountability audits at least ten randomly selected inquiries each year.[2] As at Vallejo, ten is the floor the policy sets rather than a description of the sample actually taken.

The shutdown and the vote

In November 2025 the city’s incoming police chief took the plate readers offline. Richmondside reported that he had learned of a Flock setting called “national search” which left Richmond’s data searchable by outside agencies holding a complete licence plate number, and quoted him saying “The moment I found out about this issue, I shut it off completely” and that he notified the council at once.[7]

The department disclosed the exposure itself. Its press release said there was no evidence any outside agency had accessed or misused the city’s data, and that “The system will remain offline until verified safeguards are in place to prevent similar issues.”[7] The chief’s own characterisation, as Richmondside quoted it, was that the setting was “outside the scope of what we’ve been telling people and what has been told to us”.[7]

At the March 2026 council meeting he said the setting had been active from the time the cameras came online in early 2023 until February 2025, and that Flock’s onboarding had not explained what the feature did.[8] On 17 March 2026 the council voted 4-3 to extend the contract to 31 December 2026, when it is to be re-evaluated. Four members voted in favour; three, including the mayor, voted against.[8]

Everything in this section is reporting by a local outlet, quoting a police press release and officials speaking on the record. We have not read the council record or the press release directly, and we make no finding of our own about whether any data left the city.

What the argument was about

The council debate is worth recording because it is the argument this site exists to make legible, and both sides of it were put by people with a vote.

The chief told the March 3 meeting that auto thefts had risen 33 percent since the shutdown, a year-to-date comparison of 129 against 172. A councilmember objected that the comparison was too narrow to support the claim, pointing to figures from a month when thefts rose while the cameras were still on, and said “To do a statistical analysis you can’t just cherry-pick the month that is your argument.”[8] Departmental figures Richmondside reported put vehicle thefts from December to February at 256 in 2025 to 2026 and 213 in 2024 to 2025, against 305, 251 and 335 in the same three-month window in the three preceding years.[8]

The vice mayor, who voted to restore the system, raised the opposite problem: that surrounding cities in west Contra Costa County run the same cameras, so switching Richmond’s off changes less than it appears to.[8]

Both points are about the same thing. A camera network’s value and its cost are both hard to measure from inside one city, which is why the arrangement, rather than anyone’s good faith, is the thing worth arguing about.

What it does not establish

Whether any outside agency actually retrieved Richmond data during the period the setting was on. The department says there is no evidence that any did.[7] The chief also told the council that the transparency portal’s audit view “was not coming up as showing what it created”, which is a reason to be careful about treating an absence of evidence as a finding.[8] We hold no independent record either way.

The policy and the reports state no camera count. The Atlas snapshot in this repo counts 116 Flock cameras as of April 2024.[5]

Where to ask

Richmond has already built the habit this site argues for, which makes the remaining questions narrow and answerable.

The contract runs to 31 December 2026 and the council said it would re-evaluate then. That is a date a resident can put in a diary, and the meeting is the place where the argument recorded above gets made again. Richmond City Council meets in public and takes comment.

Three records would answer most of what this page cannot. The department’s December 2025 press release. The annual browsing audit the policy requires, together with how many inquiries it actually sampled against the floor of ten. And an explanation of why the hot list categories in the 2024 and 2025 reports do not sum to the printed totals, because a published number that cannot be reconciled is worth less than one that can.

If you want to reduce your own exposure, note what the shutdown did and did not change. The readers were off in Richmond for roughly four months while neighbouring cities kept theirs running, which is the vice mayor’s point and a fair one: this is a regional system, and a decision made in one council chamber only partly governs it.

Questions

Is the system running?
Yes. It was offline from November 2025, after the chief shut it down, until the council voted 4-3 on 17 March 2026 to extend the contract to 31 December 2026. Richmondside reported the vote. The city's own transparency page still carried an undated notice describing reactivation as pending when we read it on 23 August 2026, which appears to be stale. [7] [8] [1]
What was the problem?
A Flock setting called "national search". The chief told Richmondside it made the city's data searchable by outside agencies that held a complete licence plate number, and that it had been active from when the cameras came online in early 2023 until February 2025. The department said in a press release that there is no evidence any outside agency accessed or misused the data. [7] [8]
How much does Richmond publish about its plate readers?
More than most. The city posts a report roughly every month going back to 2023, giving arrests, vehicle recoveries, cases assisted, license plate recoveries, the offences associated with arrests, and a table of hot list reads by category. Very few California departments publish anything comparable. [1] [3]
Do the published totals add up?
Not in two of the three reports we read. In the 2024 report the three listed hot list categories sum to 95,780 while the printed total is 109,776. In the 2025 report they sum to 112,970 against a printed total of 184,930. In the May 2026 report the three categories sum to 14,771, matching the printed total exactly. The listed categories therefore do not account for every read in the earlier two reports, and we do not know why. [3] [4] [6]
Can immigration authorities get the data?
The policy says the department does not permit sharing for federal immigration enforcement and names ICE and Customs and Border Patrol. It goes a step further than most: an agency requesting data must include "an acknowledgment the information received will not be used for the purpose of federal immigration enforcement". [2]

On the map

The community has mapped 577 devices of this type in the county on OpenStreetMap. These are community reports: the vendor and operator of each point are unverified, and none is confirmed to belong to this system. See them on the map →

Street names from reverse geocoding — © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

What we do not know

What you can do

Show up

Systems like this one are approved by boards, councils and committees that meet in public. We have not yet confirmed where each of them meets in Contra Costa County.

What we have documented in Contra Costa County →

Protect yourself

Practical steps to shrink your personal data trail. Our guides publish at launch; until then, EFF's Surveillance Self-Defense is the best starting point.

Surveillance Self-Defense →

Sources

  1. 1.
    City of Richmond, Flock Safety / Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Transparency Portal · Primary document · accessed · archived copy
  2. 2.
    Richmond Police Department Policy Manual, Policy 433, Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) · Primary document · accessed
  3. 3.
    Richmond Police Department, LPR Report, 1 January to 31 December 2024, dated 7 January 2025 · Primary document · · accessed · archived copy
  4. 4.
    Richmond Police Department, LPR Report, 1 January to 31 October 2025, dated 17 November 2025 · Primary document · · accessed · archived copy
  5. 5.
    EFF Atlas of Surveillance, Richmond Police Department ALPR entry (snapshot captured 2026-08-20, row dated April 2024) · Dataset · accessed · archived copy
  6. 6.
    Richmond Police Department, LPR Report, May 2026, dated 29 June 2026 · Primary document · · accessed · archived copy
  7. 7.
    Richmondside, "Richmond police chief shuts down license plate readers after discovering data was searchable", 9 December 2025 · News · · accessed · archived copy
  8. 8.
    Richmondside, "Richmond's Flock license plate readers will be turned back on through 2026", 18 March 2026 · News · · accessed · archived copy

Get the digest

A regular digest of what changed in the world of surveillance: the counties we published, the devices that appeared on the map, and the public meetings where these decisions get made. We send it when there is enough to report.

Subscribe to the newsletter

One click to unsubscribe. What we do with your address is on the newsletter page.