SIGNALDATAInsights. For the People.
Preview
License-plate readers · Utah County

Utah County

Using license-plate readers · 8 agencies documented

← Statewide map
Beaver CountyBox Elder CountyCache CountyCarbon CountyDaggett CountyDavis CountyDuchesne CountyEmery CountyGarfield CountyGrand CountyIron CountyJuab CountyKane CountyMillard CountyMorgan CountyPiute CountyRich CountySalt Lake CountySan Juan CountySanpete CountySevier CountySummit CountyTooele CountyUintah CountyUtah CountyWasatch CountyWashington CountyWayne CountyWeber County

Utah County Sheriff's Office

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
Count not documented
No agency-wide count found. KUTV (Oct. 27, 2026) reported cameras at roughly five locations in Vineyard, which is a location count, not a camera count.
Contract
Flock Safety: · KUTV and KSL reported the agreement is between Flock and the sheriff's office. KUTV reported Vineyard reimburses the cost. Amount and term not found. (KUTV, Oct. 27, 2026; KSL.com, Oct. 29, 2026)
Sources
KUTV, Oct. 27, 2026; FOX 13 News Utah, Oct. 28, 2026; KSL.com, Oct. 29, 2026
  1. Oct. 27, 2026 Vineyard's council voted unanimously to have the sheriff's office discontinue Flock service in the city. KUTV reported the office said it would abide by the result; FOX 13 reported it was working with the vendor, the city and its lawyers on what the contract requires. (KUTV, Oct. 27, 2026; FOX 13 News Utah, Oct. 28, 2026; KSL.com, Oct. 29, 2026)

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

City of Vineyard (police services through Utah County Sheriff's Office)

Status
Ended or removed
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
Count not documented
KUTV reported roughly five locations in Vineyard; no camera count was given (Oct. 27, 2026). FOX 13 described the cameras as being on roads into and out of the city.
Sources
KSL.com, Oct. 29, 2026; FOX 13 News Utah, Oct. 28, 2026; KUTV, Oct. 27, 2026; FOX 13 News Utah, Oct. 30, 2026
  1. Oct. 27, 2026 The City Council unanimously passed a resolution telling staff to seek an end to Flock service through the sheriff's office as soon as possible and to keep the city out of any renewal. KSL reported the resolution also asks that all Flock cameras in the city come down within 30 days of passage. Councilman Jacob Wood wrote the resolution. (KSL.com, Oct. 29, 2026; FOX 13 News Utah, Oct. 28, 2026; KUTV, Oct. 27, 2026)
  2. Oct. 30, 2026 FOX 13 reported on Oct. 30 that Vineyard has stopped using readers. (FOX 13 News Utah, Oct. 30, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Shutdown is not confirmed: FOX 13 reported the cameras had not been removed as of Oct. 28, 2026.
  • Date: KUTV said the vote was set for 6 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 27, 2026. KSL reported on Oct. 29 that the council voted unanimously "this week" and cited "Tuesday's meeting." FOX 13 reported the unanimous result on Oct. 28. No numeric tally was reported. The resolution itself and the minutes were not found.
  • Sources differ on the removal clock: KSL said within 30 days of the resolution's passage; KUTV, before the vote, quoted the plan as within 30 days of the contract ending.
  • KSL quoted Wood: the action "is not banning a tool; it's about a brand." KSL said the council may revisit the issue after the Legislature takes up plate readers.
  • Vineyard has no direct Flock contract. KUTV reported the city reimburses the sheriff's office for the cost.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Provo Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
24
City FAQ: 24 Flock ALPR cameras "As of August 11, 2026." The city's Feb. 3, 2026 post said 21. KSL said "over 20" in April 2026.
Contract
Flock Safety: $75,406 2025 payments · from Jan. 2025 · to Dec. 2025 · KUER figure from Transparent Utah vendor data. This is what was paid in 2025, not a contract value. Contract term not found. (KUER, Jan. 21, 2026)
Sources
Provo City, Aug. 11, 2026; Provo City, Feb. 3, 2026; Provo Municipal Council, Utah Public Notice Website, March 10, 2026; Provo Municipal Council, Utah Public Notice Website, March 24, 2026; KSL, April 27, 2026; KUER, Jan. 21, 2026
  1. 2023 The city says its police began using plate-reader cameras in 2023. KSL reported the system was implemented in fall 2023. (Provo City, Aug. 11, 2026; KSL, April 27, 2026)
  2. Feb. 3, 2026 The city posted that police use 21 plate-reader cameras and that each search needs a case number. (Provo City, Feb. 3, 2026)
  3. March 10, 2026 Police leaders and a Flock representative presented to the Municipal Council at a work meeting; the minutes record no vote on Flock. The minutes record 84 searches in the prior 30 days, a monthly audit and 30-day retention. (Provo Municipal Council, Utah Public Notice Website, March 10, 2026; Provo Municipal Council, Utah Public Notice Website, March 24, 2026)
  4. Aug. 11, 2026 The city FAQ gave its count as 24 cameras and said it is amending the contract to bar use of Provo data for training AI. The FAQ said the ALPR policy is being revised. (Provo City, Aug. 11, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Sharing: the March 10 minutes record Capt. Robert Patrick describing Flock's National Lookup program, in which participating agencies can run plate searches across the country, with those searches logged in audit trails.
  • Retention: the city says 30 days, with exceptions for data booked as evidence in a court case.
  • KSL reported about 540,000 vehicle images over a recent 30-day period (April 2026).
  • The FAQ says the city "primarily contracts" with Flock; any other vendor was not identified.

From agency records.

Orem Police Department

Status
Program documented, current use unconfirmed
Vendors
Flock Safety
Sources
KSL, March 6, 2026; Orem Police Department, Aug. 1, 2023; City of Orem, date not shown
  1. 2025 KSL reported on March 6, 2026 that Orem police used Flock cameras "last year" to trace the owner of a motorcycle whose rider evaded officers. No month was given. (KSL, March 6, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Policy 423 (Lexipol copyright 2023/08/01): data may be shared only with law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies on an approved written request, and may not be kept beyond nine months absent a warrant, preservation request or disclosure order. The policy names no vendor. The police policy page lists it as the "Orem Police LPR Camera Policy."
  • Camera count, contract and any council action were not found.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Springville Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
3
City presentation lists three cameras: 1400 N Main, 400 S near I-15, 500 S Main. The slides carry no date; the PDF file was created Sept. 16, 2026.
Sources
Springville, Utah Public Notice Website, date not shown; Springville City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 15, 2026; Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 15, 2026
  1. 2026 A city public safety document said "A recent internal audit revealed that our documentation practices fell short of the state requirements," and that the department added required search fields and plans routine audits. The document is undated, so the audit date is unknown. (Springville, Utah Public Notice Website, date not shown)
  2. Sept. 15, 2026 The City Council's work meeting agenda listed a presentation on Flock cameras and plate readers by Public Safety Director Lance Haight. Work meetings take no formal action. (Springville City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 15, 2026; Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 15, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Sharing per the city document: "verified law enforcement agencies within Utah and in neighboring states." Retention: 30 days unless linked to an active investigation.
  • Council minutes for the Sept. 15 meeting were not found. Contract and cost not found.

From agency records.

Pleasant Grove Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
Count not documented
No department total found. KUTV reported two Flock Falcon readers at the Grove Creek and Battle Creek trailheads (Sept. 29, 2026); that is not a citywide count.
Sources
North Utah County Water Conservancy District, Utah Public Notice Website, Nov. 20, 2025; Utah Public Notice Website, March 19, 2026; KUTV, Sept. 29, 2026; Pleasant Grove City, date not shown
  1. Nov. 20, 2025 North Utah County Water Conservancy District minutes describe a Flock quote for Grove Creek: a $7,500 setup fee and $3,000 per camera per year on a proposed three-year contract, through an interlocal agreement with the city. The minutes record no vote. (North Utah County Water Conservancy District, Utah Public Notice Website, Nov. 20, 2025)
  2. March 19, 2026 The water district board's agenda listed "Pleasant Grove Flock cameras." The notice gives no detail or result. (Utah Public Notice Website, March 19, 2026)
  3. Sept. 29, 2026 KUTV reported police confirmed the trailhead devices are Flock Falcon readers, put in within the last few months in response to repeated car break-ins, theft and graffiti. The report does not say who owns them, and KUTV said it had no clear answer on who paid. (KUTV, Sept. 29, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • KUTV said public records show the water district agreed to pay for separate Flock security cameras at both sites through the city's Flock contract, and it was unclear whether that covered these readers. KUTV's statement implies the city has a Flock contract; the contract itself was not found.
  • The department's page says it "utilizes Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) for official law enforcement purposes" and links a policy PDF.
  • KUTV reported Lt. Derick Shumway estimated the department solves about 30% more crime with Flock; he gave no underlying figures.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Lone Peak Police Department (Alpine and Highland)

Status
Removing or limiting cameras
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
12
Alpine minutes, Sept. 22, 2026: 12 cameras, six in Alpine and six in Highland, per the chief's report from the transparency portal. The council that night voted to cut Alpine to three; whether the removal has happened was not found.
Contract
Flock Safety: $15,000 year · from Jan. 2023 · to April 2026 · Alpine's six cameras, not to exceed this amount, plus a one-time $2,100 implementation fee. (Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026)
Contract
Flock Safety: $18,000 year · from April 2026 · to April 2029 · Alpine's automatic three-year renewal in April 2026, as invoiced for six cameras at $3,000 each (INV-104406, dated 9/14/2026). End date computed from the three-year term. The council then authorized a $9,000 annual fee for three cameras. (Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026; Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026)
Sources
Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026; Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026; Highland City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Aug. 18, 2026
  1. Jan. 10, 2023 Alpine City Council approved buying six Flock cameras at no more than $15,000 a year, 3-1. (Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026)
  2. Jan. 24, 2023 Alpine City Council authorized Chief Brian Gwilliam to sign the contract, with a $2,100 implementation fee, 4-1. (Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026)
  3. April 2026 Alpine's contract automatically renewed for three years. City staff said no agreement other than the original had been executed. (Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026)
  4. July 21, 2026 Highland City Council heard a communication item on its six Flock cameras; no vote was taken. Minutes record 27 searches in the prior 30 days on Lone Peak's portal. (Highland City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Aug. 18, 2026)
  5. Sept. 22, 2026 Alpine City Council voted 4-1 to keep Flock with three cameras instead of six at a $9,000 annual fee, conditioned on confirming the city operates under the original contract. Blackwell, Rummler, Smuin and Hannemann voted yes; Young voted no. (Alpine City Council, Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 22, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Sharing per the Alpine minutes: "Data is shared only with other Utah agencies using the same vendor system." Retention: the chief said no more than 30 days.
  • Alpine's termination clause costs $500 per camera; the minutes put the charge for removing three at $1,500.
  • The Alpine figures do not cover Highland. Highland's contract terms and cost were not found.
  • The published Sept. 22 minutes do not show whether they have been approved.

From agency records.

Brigham Young University Police Department

Status
Program documented, current use unconfirmed
Vendors
Vendor not named in source
Sources
Brigham Young University Police Department, July 27, 2026; Brigham Young University Police Department, date not shown; Utah Legislature, interim committee materials, Sept. 16, 2026
  1. Sept. 16, 2026 A list of plate-reader success stories given to the Legislature's Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee, with no author named, said BYU Police built readers into campus security and parking systems. The case it cites is undated. (Utah Legislature, interim committee materials, Sept. 16, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Policy 427 (Lexipol copyright 2026/07/27) covers plate readers: data sharing only with law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies on an approved written request, no retention beyond nine months absent a warrant, preservation request or disclosure order, and search records kept at least five years. It names no vendor.

From agency records.

Statewide

  1. 2013 S.B. 196 put plate-reader guidelines for "a person or governmental entity" into law, per a legislative staff history. The code shows the Act's title section as enacted by Chapter 447 of the 2013 General Session. (Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, Sept. 16, 2026; Utah Legislature, 2025)
  2. 2014 Legislative staff say S.B. 222 narrowed the restrictions so they cover only government entities and made those entities get a warrant or court order for data held privately. S.B. 51 put public transit districts on the list of allowed users. (Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, Sept. 16, 2026)
  3. 2020 Legislative staff say H.B. 128 let higher education institutions use the readers. H.B. 443 extended that to the Utah Inland Port Authority in 2022. (Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, Sept. 16, 2026)
  4. 2023 Legislative staff say S.B. 250 made police log their plate-data searches and publish their policies, and spelled out which police uses are allowed. UDOT says the bill also set up a way for municipalities to get permission for readers in state rights-of-way. (Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, Sept. 16, 2026; Utah Department of Transportation, date not shown)
  5. 2024 Legislative staff say S.B. 45 let police use the readers to reach the Utah Criminal Justice Information System and added a definition of "active criminal investigation." (Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, Sept. 16, 2026)
  6. 2025 H.B. 468 (Chevrier) proposed 90-day maximum retention, annual reporting to the Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, and First Amendment limits. Utah News Dispatch reported it passed the House and died in the Senate. S.B. 138 (Owens), also 2025, would have removed the warrant requirement for plate data from nongovernmental sources. (Utah Legislature, 2025; Utah News Dispatch, Aug. 20, 2026; Utah Legislature, 2025)
  7. Jan. 30, 2025 The State Auditor's privacy office published a draft privacy alert on plate readers listing concerns about retention, sharing and misconfigured systems and recommending published policies and routine audits. It names no Utah agency and gives no Utah counts. (Utah Office of the State Auditor, Jan. 30, 2025)
  8. May 14, 2025 The Utah Office of Data Privacy published its review of a complaint about two unnamed law enforcement agencies. It found neither had a filed retention schedule for plate data, found policy language at one that went beyond or conflicted with the Act, and recommended corrections. (Utah Office of Data Privacy, May 14, 2025)
  9. Sept. 30, 2025 The Utah Privacy Commission's FY2026 report recommended the Legislature consider a version of H.B. 468 reflecting consensus among major stakeholders, including law enforcement. (Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 30, 2025)
  10. Oct. 14, 2025 The current version of 41-6a-2003 took effect, as amended by Chapter 9 of the 2025 First Special Session, according to the Legislature's code site. Under the Act, plate data a government entity captures is a protected record that may not be kept more than nine months except as listed, and police need a written policy on use, management and auditing. (Utah Legislature, Oct. 14, 2025; Utah Legislature, 2025)
  11. 2026 A Utah Privacy Commission ALPR Task Force advisory recommended a 21-day retention baseline, with up to nine months for agencies in a state study. It asked policymakers to consider immutable audit logs and limits on vendors using Utah data for AI training, and to evaluate protections against direct, bulk or unrestricted out-of-state access. The advisory's text is undated. (Utah Privacy Commission (Utah Public Notice Website), 2026)
  12. 2026 The same advisory said Salt Lake County Criminal Justice Executive Board minutes of Feb. 12, 2014, indicate agreements were prepared to authorize sharing data, including plate data, with Palantir systems. It said the extent of any data provided is unknown and that it had not verified a report the state's Palantir relationship ended around 2021. (Utah Privacy Commission (Utah Public Notice Website), 2026)
  13. March 3, 2026 A House committee report dated March 3, 2026 returned H.B. 327, whose first substitute was titled License Plate Reader and Data Retention Amendments, to the Rules Committee. The substitute would have set 150-day general retention and banned facial recognition. KSL reported, without giving a bill number, that a related 2026 bill did not get a hearing. (Utah Legislature, 2026; KSL, Aug. 20, 2026; Utah Legislature, March 3, 2026)
  14. March 4, 2026 Utah Privacy Commission minutes recorded the expectation that H.B. 327 would likely not pass that session, with issues unresolved between police agencies and legislators. (Utah Public Notice Website, March 4, 2026)
  15. May 19, 2026 Rep. Chevrier wrote to the Utah Privacy Commission asking for recommendations on 1st Sub. H.B. 327 for the 2027 session by Sept. 30, 2026. (Utah Public Notice Website, May 19, 2026)
  16. Aug. 2026 KSL reported that Utah law enforcement agencies need a memorandum of understanding with the Department of Public Safety before they can trade plate data with one another, in a story on Davis County commissioners approving theirs 2-1. (KSL, Aug. 15, 2026)
  17. Aug. 14, 2026 Utah News Dispatch reported Utah Civic Compact figures showing 10 Weber County Flock cameras were searched 5.1 million times from February 2022 through July 2026, with almost 97% of searches from out-of-state agencies. The Compact said it was not alleging unlawful activity. (Utah News Dispatch, Aug. 14, 2026)
  18. Aug. 20, 2026 Gov. Cox said he was "deeply troubled" and asked the Utah Privacy Governing Board and Utah Privacy Commission to review the rules, especially local agency use. "If there are some gaps, then yes, I would absolutely support legislation," he said. (KSL, Aug. 20, 2026; Utah News Dispatch, Aug. 20, 2026)
  19. Sept. 2, 2026 KUTV reported an aide said House Speaker Mike Schultz would seek legislation restricting Flock cameras and setting limits on the handling of their data, including its sale, and did not rule out a special session. Sen. Kathleen Riebe said she wants to propose limits too. (KUTV, Sept. 2, 2026)
  20. Sept. 8, 2026 A Utah Civic Compact presentation to the Utah Privacy Commission set Weber County's Flock contract beside the statute. It showed the contract's "Permitted Purpose" definition next to the four purposes for which police may access captured plate data, and said Flock holds final discretion to veto a camera location. It stated no formal compliance finding. (Utah Civic Compact (Utah Public Notice Website), Sept. 8, 2026)
  21. Sept. 16, 2026 The Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee heard staff, police groups and the Office of Data Privacy on plate readers, with no vote. Co-chair Sen. Calvin Musselman said lawmakers are "not considering a ban on license plate readers," and a bill file was opened. (Utah Legislature, Sept. 16, 2026; FOX 13 News Utah, Sept. 17, 2026; KSL, Sept. 16, 2026)
  22. Sept. 16, 2026 The Utah Law Enforcement Legislative Committee, whose voting members include the Department of Public Safety and Attorney General's Office, told the committee it supports explicit bans on unauthorized use, periodic external audits and notifying people whose data was unlawfully accessed. It said retention changes need further discussion. (Utah Law Enforcement Legislative Committee (via Utah Legislature), Sept. 16, 2026)
  23. Sept. 23, 2026 The Utah Privacy Governing Board's agenda for Sept. 23 scheduled a workshop on its review approach, with speakers listed from the Privacy Commission task force, the Department of Public Safety, the Attorney General's Office, the Riverton City Council, the Cato Institute and the Libertas Institute. (Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 23, 2026)
  24. Oct. 2026 Privacy advocates presented possible limits to legislators, including tighter access, shorter retention and new ways to challenge misuse, the Tribune reported (weekday only: a Wednesday before Oct. 22). TownLift reported the bill has no number yet. (The Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 22, 2026; TownLift, Oct. 22, 2026)
  25. Oct. 28, 2026 KSL reported that Utah Civic Compact president Connor Radcliffe estimates Utah has at least 1,000 plate-reader cameras, and that a precise count has been hard to pin down. (KSL, Oct. 28, 2026)

State agencies

Utah Department of Public Safety (including Utah Highway Patrol, State Bureau of Investigation and SIAC)

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Vendor not named in source
Cameras
Count not documented
No reader count found. The policy and SIAC page give none.
Sources
Utah Department of Public Safety (SIAC), July 22, 2025; Utah Statewide Information and Analysis Center, date not shown; Utah Department of Public Safety (Utah Public Notice Website), date not shown; KSL, March 6, 2026; KSL, April 27, 2026; KSL, Aug. 15, 2026; Utah Legislature, interim committee materials, Sept. 16, 2026; Utah Law Enforcement Legislative Committee (via Utah Legislature), Sept. 16, 2026; Utah Public Notice Website, Sept. 23, 2026
  1. Dec. 20, 2023 UDOT special use permit application R2-ALPRS 002 for DPS was signed; the published form lists no locations, camera count or contractor. (Utah Department of Public Safety (SIAC), July 22, 2025)
  2. July 22, 2025 Latest Lexipol copyright date on DPS Policy 639: nine-month retention, release of data to agencies that have signed a memorandum of understanding, and audits "on a regular basis." (Utah Department of Public Safety (SIAC), July 22, 2025)
  3. March 6, 2026 DPS investigations chief Tanner Jensen told KSL the technology is "a vital tool for law enforcement." KSL reported in April that police are working with lawmakers on guardrails, and Jensen said the state is trying to balance the technology with civil and privacy rights. (KSL, March 6, 2026; KSL, April 27, 2026)
  4. Aug. 2026 KSL reported Davis County commissioners approved a plate-data sharing agreement with DPS, and that Weber County approved its agreement with the state on June 2. (KSL, Aug. 15, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • An undated DPS slide deck says "To date, 23 agencies have signed the DPS MOU"; it counts agencies, not cameras, and has no date.
  • SIAC's page says DPS scan data purges automatically after 9 months, DPS cannot access commercial plate data without a warrant, and sharing requires an inter-agency agreement. It names Flock only as an example of a company offering a device, not as DPS's vendor.
  • Policy 639 does not name UHP or SBI, though it refers to troopers. A success-story handout at the Sept. 16, 2026 hearing says UHP used mobile units on I-15 and I-80 in 2018. No separate SBI or UHP program record was found.
  • No Attorney General enforcement action on plate readers was found; the AG's Office appears only as a member of the law enforcement legislative committee and as a scheduled speaker to the Privacy Governing Board.

From agency records.