Pingree Grove Flock license-plate cameras: cost, policy and records

Records checked October 3, 2026. Pingree Grove's village website reports that 14 Flock automated license-plate readers went into service in August 2025. Its ALPR information page describes a two-year initial authorization. The board's original approval, the packet's price schedule and today's public dashboard answer different questions about the program.

This guide brings those records together: what was approved, what the public statements say about use and retention, and what remains unresolved. It covers village police license-plate readers, rather than treating all police cameras as one system.

What the board approved and what the camera program costs

On December 16, 2024, the village board approved a master services agreement for purchasing and installing 14 automatic license-plate readers, under an agenda item specifying an amount not to exceed $55,400. The recorded vote was 6–0. Approved minutes, PDF page 3.

The accompanying packet explains the proposed price structure:

Cost or term	What the December 2024 packet says	How to interpret it
First-year subtotal	$55,400	Quoted platform and implementation charges
Annual platform amount	$42,000	Recurring amount shown in the order form
One-time implementation fees	$13,400 combined	$3,250 standard implementation, $10,000 pole implementation and $150 existing-infrastructure implementation
Additional year if renewed	$42,000	Staff's conditional renewal estimate
Two-year amount if renewed	$97,400	Staff's sum of first year and one renewal year; not proof that $97,400 has been paid
Trial	60-day opt-out period	The packet describes a trial before the paid initial term
Order-form initial term	12 months	Requires care when comparing it with the website's two-year authorization description

Sources: December 16 packet, PDF pages 179–180 and 202–205.

The packet is the agreement package presented to the board; the order-form signature fields in that copy are uncompleted. The minutes establish approval. This review has not verified the mutually executed final agreement, the precise paid-term start date, a renewal action or a complete vendor payment ledger. The website's two-year description should therefore not be converted into an independently verified expiration date.

The current camera budget is a different figure

The FY2026–27 adopted Capital Improvement schedule lists $87,000 for camera equipment, account 70-45-53-1500. That account is broader than a vendor-specific invoice. It should not be described as the Flock contract price without the detailed allocation. The prior-year columns show a $55,400 budget and $55,820 projection for the same account; these are budget-document figures, not a verified camera invoice total. Adopted budget, PDF page 27, printed page 24.

Use the budget and spending tracker for the distinction between a budget, board approval and payment.

Published use rules and the policy-document limitation

The village's current ALPR webpage describes use for violent crimes, stolen vehicles and missing or endangered people, with written chief approval for other serious felonies. It says the program is not for traffic enforcement, repossessions, unpaid fines or revenue collection, and describes a default 30-day footage-retention period.

The linked policy PDF needs an important qualification. The eight-page download retrieved on October 3 contains one ALPR page, numbered 430 in the manual, followed by seven pages concerning other policies. It does not provide the continuation of ALPR Policy 435.

That ALPR page requires a specific, documented law-enforcement purpose for searches and department-approved training. Its general operations language also refers to routine patrol and criminal investigations. The footer bears April 11, 2025; that footer alone does not establish a policy adoption or revision date.

The narrower webpage description and the incomplete manual excerpt should not be silently combined into a claim that the complete, current policy has been verified. A complete Policy 435, its effective date and any later directives are needed to reconcile scope and establish the full access, retention and audit procedures.

What the public Flock dashboard showed

The village's Flock transparency portal displayed an update date of October 2, 2026 when reviewed October 3.

Dashboard measure	Displayed figure	What readers should keep separate
Cameras	14	The dashboard defines this as LPR and other cameras
Retention	30 days	A platform retention setting does not establish deletion of every separately preserved evidence copy
Search sessions, last 30 days	12	Searches are not the same as automatically captured plate reads
Hotlist hits, last 30 days	9,570	Alerts are not a count of arrests, confirmed crimes or unique offenders
Unique plate reads, last 30 days	267,213	This is not a count of village residents

These are dated, agency/vendor-published measures, not independently audited outcomes. The portal also provides a downloadable search-activity file. An activity extract can help identify the recorded reasons for searches; it does not by itself prove compliance with every rule or measure the program's effect on crime.

The 30-day rule does not answer every retention question

The December 2024 agreement package describes rolling 30-day platform deletion and separately makes the customer responsible for extracting and archiving footage on its own storage. That is why the platform window should not be presented as a guarantee that every evidentiary copy disappears after 30 days. The final executed terms and the department's complete evidence-retention rules remain relevant. Agreement package, PDF pages 181 and 183.

Data sharing: two public displays need reconciliation

The village's ALPR webpage says access is limited to Illinois law-enforcement agencies and says it does not share with agencies outside Illinois or federal government agencies.

The October 2 dashboard, reviewed October 3, displayed City of Delavan WI PD, Elkhorn WI PD, Genoa City WI PD, Kenosha WI Joint Services and Sharon WI PD in its Sharing Network Data With list. The portal describes that list as organizations granted access to Pingree Grove data. Flock transparency portal.

Those published descriptions do not match. The snapshot does not establish why, whether any listed agency actually accessed data, or whether a prohibited use occurred. Current sharing settings, their change history and relevant access records are needed to resolve the difference.

The dashboard's separate Receiving Network Data From list describes the other direction of access. An agency appearing there should not automatically be described as receiving Pingree Grove's data. This review does not establish immigration-enforcement access or any individual misuse.

Records that would complete the oversight picture

Unresolved question	Specific record needed
What are the binding price, term and renewal conditions?	Executed agreement and order form, amendments, operational acceptance date and renewal records
What has the village actually paid?	Flock invoices, vendor ledger and payment records, including installation, subscriptions and later additions
Which rules currently govern searches?	Complete Policy 435, effective date, revisions and applicable directives
Which agencies can access village data?	Current outgoing sharing configuration, historical changes and applicable sharing agreements
How is compliance reviewed?	Audit procedures and completed review findings, with appropriate redactions
What happens to saved evidence?	Department rules for exported footage, case evidence and deletion
What outcomes can be documented?	Defined, consistently reported case outcomes, rather than treating every hotlist alert as an arrest

The village and police public-records page is the official starting point. The WorthFighting public-records guide explains how to identify the right public body and request existing records.

A request can specify the agreement approved December 16, 2024, Policy 435, the relevant date range and administrative sharing or audit records. Publication of program records does not mean individual vehicle histories or investigative evidence are available without restrictions. No request or complaint has been submitted as part of this review.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Pingree Grove have Flock license-plate cameras?

Yes. The village reports 14 units operating since August 2025. The public dashboard displayed 14 cameras when reviewed on October 3, 2026.

How much did the village approve for the cameras?

The December 16, 2024 board minutes record approval under an item capped at $55,400. The packet separately quotes $42,000 for an additional year if renewed. Those figures do not establish the total actually paid through 2026.

Are these speed-ticket cameras?

The village describes the ALPR program as an investigative resource and says it is not used for traffic enforcement. Plate readers should not be treated as evidence that a speed-camera ticket program exists.

Is all camera information deleted after 30 days?

The published platform setting is 30 days. The agreement package also contemplates separately archived footage, so that setting does not establish the retention period for every saved evidence copy.

Does a hotlist hit prove a crime or arrest?

No. The dashboard counts alerts separately from search sessions. Establishing an arrest, charge or case outcome requires the corresponding records and consistent definitions.

Does the public record settle who can access Pingree Grove data?

Not fully. The village's Illinois-only statement and the dashboard's outgoing sharing list differ. Current settings, change history and access records are needed before drawing conclusions about actual access or use.

Review scope and updates

This edition distinguishes approved action, the proposed agreement package, the village's public description, the incomplete policy download and a dated dashboard snapshot. It does not certify legal compliance or effectiveness.

The next revision should prioritize the executed contract and renewal record, complete current policy, vendor payments and reconciliation of the sharing displays. Dashboard statistics will change; retain the snapshot date when citing them. Return to the Pingree Grove civic hub for related local records.

Related Pingree Grove guides

Return to the Pingree Grove development, taxes and village-records hub.

• Pingree Grove FOIA and public records
• Pingree Grove FY2026–27 budget and spending approvals
• Cambridge Lakes HOA fees, rules and safety records