City Flock Camera Records
Flock Cameras in Bay Village, Ohio
Bay Village is not a published cancellation fight. It is a contract-record case. The useful part is what the public order form says before residents have to guess: camera count, term length, renewal language, retention, and network access.
The short version
Bay Village, Ohio has a public Flock Safety order form for the Bay Village Police Department that lists eight Flock Safety Falcon license plate reader cameras.
The order form lists an initial term of 60 months, a renewal term of 24 months, annual billing, a $20,000 annual recurring subtotal, and a $100,000 contract total.
The same order form lists a 30-day retention period and includes FlockOS features such as community network access, state network license plate lookup, nationwide network license plate lookup, law enforcement network access, time and location search, and license plate lookup.
What Bay Village bought
The public order form identifies the customer as OH - Bay Village PD and gives the address as 28000 Wolf Road in Bay Village, Ohio.
Under hardware and software products, the order form lists FlockOS Essentials and eight Flock Safety Falcon cameras. It describes the Falcon as an infrastructure-free license plate reader camera that uses Vehicle Fingerprint technology to capture vehicle attributes.
The term begins upon first installation and validation of Flock hardware, according to the product description section of the order form.
The contract math
The order form lists $20,000 for the Flock Safety Platform in year one and a $20,000 annual recurring subtotal after year one.
It also lists a $20,000 discount applied to the Flock Safety Platform and a $100,000 contract total before tax. Taxes are shown as an estimate, and the form says actual taxes are the customer's responsibility.
For a city council or resident, the simple read is this: Bay Village's public record shows an eight-camera system priced at $20,000 per year across a 60-month initial term.
The renewal clause matters
The order form says the agreement automatically renews for successive renewal terms unless either party gives notice of non-renewal at least 30 days before the end of the then-current term.
That clause is easy to miss because the headline number is the $100,000 contract total. But renewal language is one of the most important parts of any Flock purchase.
A city that wants real oversight should calendar the non-renewal deadline, publish the renewal decision before it becomes automatic, and review usage logs, sharing settings, camera uptime, and outcomes before another term starts.
The network-access section is the policy question
The Bay Village order form includes FlockOS feature descriptions. Community Network Access is described as the ability to request direct access to feeds from privately owned Flock Falcon cameras in neighborhoods, schools, and businesses in the community.
State Network is described as allowing agencies to look up plates on all cameras opted into the Flock network within the state. Nationwide Network is described as letting law enforcement agencies use a nationwide system with 10 billion additional plate reads per month.
Those features do not prove Bay Village enabled every sharing option. They do show why councils should ask a specific question before approval: which network features are active, who may request access, who approves it, and how those requests are audited.
What Flock says about retention and access
Flock's public License Plate Reader Policy says LPR data is hard deleted on a rolling 30-day basis by default, unless a different schedule is required by customer law or policy.
The same policy says all queries are stored for auditing purposes, including username, date, time, purpose of query, and license plate or other elements used to query the system.
Flock's Trust Center says every search is tied to a specific user and recorded automatically. It also says customers control their own data and may choose to share information through a broader network, but nothing is shared automatically.
What residents should ask next
The public order form answers the basic procurement questions. It does not answer every governance question.
Bay Village residents should be able to see the written use policy, camera locations, active sharing settings, outside-agency access rules, audit schedule, monthly query counts, hit outcomes, and the city's process for deciding whether to renew.
That is not anti-police or anti-technology. It is normal contract oversight. A five-year public-safety data contract should have a public record trail that goes beyond price and product names.
The bottom line
Bay Village's Flock record is useful because it shows the shape of a mid-sized local ALPR contract: eight cameras, $20,000 per year, a 60-month term, 30-day retention, and listed network lookup features.
There is no need to invent a local controversy from that record. The real issue is simpler. The contract gives residents enough detail to ask better questions before renewal, especially about network access, audits, and whether the system delivered results worth another term.
For any city reviewing Flock, Bay Village is a reminder that the order form is only the beginning. The public also needs the policy controls that explain how the system is actually used.
Sources used
City of Bay Village, Flock Safety + OH - Bay Village PD order form and law enforcement agreement: https://www.cityofbayvillage.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6562/Flock-Safety-Contract-Extension---Bay-Village-PD---Law-Enforcement-Agreement--_
Flock Safety, License Plate Reader Policy: https://www.flocksafety.com/legal/lpr-policy
Flock Safety, Privacy, Data & Civil Liberties Policies: https://www.flocksafety.com/trust