Short answer. We collected 345 public statements from 294 police departments, sheriffs, state agencies and law-enforcement groups in 48 states and DC about license-plate readers (ALPRs) between 1 January and 10 October 2026. 239 of them came in August and September, when Florida, Texas, Missouri and Rhode Island acted within weeks of each other.
- Missouri, EO 26-18: 22 statements from 11 agencies and groups. None opposed the order. Most said they already met it; St. Louis County cut retention from 90 to 30 days.
- Nationally: 145 agencies said they would keep using ALPRs (36 of them with tighter rules) and 91 paused, ended or removed them. Florida alone accounts for 31 of the 91, Virginia for 15.
- The most repeated number is 30 days. Of 48 agencies that stated a retention period, 30 said 30 days, the old Flock default. Flock switched its default to 7 days on 13 August FOX10 (13 Aug 2026).
- The most repeated safeguards: audits (79 statements), "we punish misuse" (46), limited out-of-state sharing (45), no immigration use (38) and a case number for every search (37).
| At a glance | Figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Statements collected | 345 (1 Jan to 10 Oct 2026) | This dataset |
| Agencies and groups | 294: 195 police-department statements, 110 sheriff statements, plus state agencies, campus police, prosecutors and associations | This dataset |
| States covered | 48 states and DC, plus national groups (none found in Montana or New Hampshire) | This dataset |
| Vendor named | Flock in 272 of 345 statements | This dataset |
| Missouri EO 26-18 responses | 22 statements, 0 opposed | Executive Order 26-18, Missouri Secretary of State (16 Sep 2026) |
| Most common retention stated | 30 days (30 of 48 agencies) | This dataset |
| Biggest single trigger | Florida's order to clear state roads: 67 statements from 58 agencies | Jax Today (31 Aug 2026) |
What does Missouri Executive Order 26-18 require?
Governor Mike Kehoe signed Executive Order 26-18 on 16 September 2026. It applies to state agencies and to local law enforcement that "receive state funding and utilize ALPR technology", until the legislature passes a permanent law Executive Order 26-18, Missouri Secretary of State (16 Sep 2026). Two weeks later the Department of Public Safety sent a 10-page guidance document to every agency on its records Missouri DPS release (30 Sep 2026).
| Rule | What the order says |
|---|---|
| Retention | Plate and vehicle images deleted within 30 days unless tied to "a specific, active, and ongoing criminal investigation" or an active life-safety emergency such as a missing person or AMBER/Silver Alert |
| Ownership | Data stays "the sole and exclusive property" of the agency |
| Vendors | Barred from accessing, selling, sharing or commercialising Missouri data; contracts must certify 30-day deletion |
| Allowed use | "the administration of criminal justice" and "bona fide lifesaving efforts" |
| Facial recognition | May not be integrated with ALPR systems |
| Search logging | Every query logs the user and a case number or specific justification |
| Misuse | Personal use, stalking, unauthorised sharing or non-criminal hot-list entries trigger discipline, possible criminal referral (Section 576.050 RSMo) and a report to the DPS Director |
| DPS guidance (30 Sep) | Legitimate purpose for every search, individual accountability, independent verification of alerts, audits at least monthly, no facial recognition |
The order also tells DPS to draft legislation with the Missouri Police Chiefs Association, Missouri Sheriffs Association, Fraternal Order of Police, Highway Patrol and prosecutors Executive Order 26-18, Missouri Secretary of State (16 Sep 2026). The order itself names no misuse case; the governor's release cited a New York investigator's arrest, and Missouri cases in St. Charles County, Brentwood and Joplin were in the news at the time (see the documented misuse cases).
How did Missouri law enforcement respond to EO 26-18?
Every Missouri agency that spoke publicly supported the order or described it neutrally. We found no Missouri police statement opposing it. 13 of the 22 statements said the agency already met the rules fully or partly; the changes announced were small.
- St. Louis County Police cut retention from 90 to 30 days and said its policies "are consistent with the standards outlined in Governor Kehoe's executive order" First Alert 4 / KMOV (staff), 2026-09-25. Chief Juan Cox: “We were already on board with the governor's executive order. I think it's a great executive order.” St. Louis Public Radio (Rachel Lippmann), 2026-10-05
- St. Charles County Police (which had dropped Flock for Genetec in August) called it “a good action by the governor” Spectrum News St. Louis (John Gerding), 2026-09-17. A later county release: “No one can just log on and start looking up whoever they want” St. Charles County government news flash, 2026-10-05.
- Columbia Police said it already complied except for the new vendor certification, which it is obtaining KRCG, 2026-09-16. Chief Jill Schlude: “Technology can make us more effective, but with that capability comes a responsibility to use it appropriately and transparently” KOMU 8, 2026-09-16.
- Springfield Police (41 Flock cameras) said the order would not change its policy, and later called the DPS guidance “reasonable and appropriate parameters” KSMU (Michele Skalicky), 2026-10-02.
- The only concern raised came from Blue Springs Chief Bob Muenz, two days before the order was signed: “30 days is not long enough sometimes when you talk about investigations and search warrants and trying to get leads” KCTV5, 2026-09-16.
- Declined: University City Police (citing pending litigation) and, on a later interview request, Columbia Police.
| Agency | Date | What the statement says | Already compliant? | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blue Springs Police Departmentagency statement (sent to Spectrum News) | 2026-09-16 | In a statement to Spectrum News, Blue Springs PD said its policy and guidelines already align with the Governor's executive order and that it supports the commitment to transparency and accountability. Spectrum paraphrased this without quotation marks; its text reads: 'In a statement sent to Spectrum News the department said that their policy and guidelines are already in alignment with the Governor's executive order and they support the commitment to transparency and accountability.' | Yes | Spectrum News (St. Louis/Missouri) |
| Blue Springs Police DepartmentBob Muenz, Police Chief | 2026-09-16 | KCTV5 reported that Chief Muenz said the department had reviewed the order and does not need to change its policies. In separate pre-order remarks the same article quotes, he warned that retention under 30 days could hinder investigations, saying 30 days is sometimes not long enough. | Yes | KCTV5 |
| Columbia Police DepartmentJill Schlude, Police Chief (department news release); agency statement | 2026-09-16 | Columbia PD said it supports EO 26-18, believes its current ALPR policies and operations already comply except for the new vendor compliance certification, which it is working to obtain, and said it would make any necessary policy, training or system changes. | Partly | KOMU 8 |
| Kansas City Missouri Police Departmentagency statement (to Spectrum News) | 2026-09-16 | Spectrum News reported, without quotation marks, that KCPD uses Flock cameras for criminal investigations under strict policies, and that the cameras have aided investigations ranging from homicides to minor property crimes. Spectrum's text: 'The Kansas City Police Department said that they use flock cameras for criminal investigations and have strict policies governing the use of criminal justice systems.' | not stated | Spectrum News (St. Louis/Missouri) |
| Missouri Department of Public SafetyMark James, Director, Missouri Department of Public Safety | 2026-09-16 | DPS Director Mark James called ALPRs a valuable tool for catching violent criminals, recovering stolen vehicles and finding missing people, and said DPS would work with law enforcement and the General Assembly to implement the order. | not stated | Office of Governor Mike Kehoe |
| Missouri Department of Public Safetyunnamed DPS official (to KRCG) | 2026-09-16 | KRCG reported: 'An official with the Missouri Department of Public Safety said about 400 ALPRs were state-funded,' against more than 3,400 ALPRs in Missouri counted by the Finding Flock site. | not stated | KRCG 13 |
| Missouri State Highway PatrolCapt. Eric Brown, Missouri State Highway Patrol; MSHP spokesperson | 2026-09-16 | MSHP said it operates six Flock cameras (contracted through DPS, used to track stolen cars), already had retention set to 30 days, and that the order did not require any immediate changes; MSHP and DPS were discussing what compliance looks like. | Yes | KFVS12 |
| Missouri Police Chiefs Legislative Coalitioncoalition statement (unnamed spokesperson per Spectrum; West Newsmagaz | 2026-09-17 | The coalition supports the order, says ALPRs help recover stolen vehicles, find missing people and develop leads in violent crimes, calls misuse unacceptable, and says it will work with the governor and lawmakers. The two outlets word the statement differently: the first three segments are from Spectrum (typos as published there), the last two from West Newsmagazine. | not stated | Spectrum News St. Louis (John Gerding) |
| Springfield Police DepartmentMaj. Tad Peters, Springfield Police Department | 2026-09-17 | Springfield police told KY3 that the governor's order won't change their ALPR policy or how they use their 41 Flock cameras, saying their own restrictions already meet or exceed the new state safeguards. | Yes | KY3 |
| St. Charles County Police DepartmentKurt Frisz, Chief of Police | 2026-09-17 | Frisz backed the order, said the county's policies (Genetec cameras, a report number and a second person from the RIIC for every inquiry, officer verification before acting on alerts, no facial recognition) already meet or beat it, and said chiefs want to work with legislators on 'common-sense legislation'. | Yes | Spectrum News St. Louis (John Gerding) |
| St. Louis County Police Departmentagency statement (unnamed department spokesperson) | 2026-09-17 | Spokesperson said the department already follows the order's requirements (FOX 2: 'nearly all') but must cut its LPR data retention from 90 days to 30 days to comply, and will keep using ALPR for criminal justice and lifesaving purposes. | Partly | Spectrum News St. Louis (John Gerding) |
| Missouri State Highway PatrolCapt. Eric Brown, Missouri State Highway Patrol (email); agency statem | 2026-09-22 | In a story on the order and statewide Flock scrutiny, MSHP said its main ALPR use is criminal and missing-person investigations, that it does not access the system at ICE's request, and that it could not speculate about third-party data showing immigration-labelled searches; the statement does not address the order directly. | not stated | St. Louis Public Radio / Midwest Newsroom |
| St. Louis County Police Departmentagency statement (unnamed, provided to First Alert 4 / KMOV) | 2026-09-25 | Issued the day County Executive Sam Page ordered an ALPR review, the department said its existing policies are consistent with the governor's order, retention is now 30 days, and data is not shared outside the St. Louis/St. Charles County RIIC. | Yes | First Alert 4 / KMOV (staff) |
| St. Louis County Police DepartmentLt. Jeff Warner, commander, St. Louis County Regional Information and | 2026-09-25 | In KMOV's story on the county ALPR review that followed the governor's order, the RIIC commander said officers' access to historical LPR data has been restricted after the misuse cases. | not stated | First Alert 4 / KMOV (staff) |
| Grandview Police DepartmentRichard Rogers, Police Chief (statement to the Telegraph); Valarie Poi | 2026-09-28 | Chief Rogers said Grandview regulates ALPR use with a strong policy, enforces it, and imposes swift consequences for violations. Poindexter, paraphrased, said the department runs 20 Flock cameras (installed 2023), deletes data not needed as evidence after 30 days (the default since installation), conducts regular audits and uses software that flags suspicious activity, all of which were in place before the governor's order. | Yes | Martin City Telegraph |
| Kansas City Missouri Police DepartmentJake Becchina, Media Unit Commander | 2026-09-28 | Becchina told the Martin City Telegraph, which paraphrased him, that KCPD operates 540 Genetec ALPR cameras, not Flock. He said the department will review its policies to stay in compliance with the governor's order and will adjust data retention. He did not say how long KCPD kept ALPR data before the order. Telegraph text: 'Becchina also said the department will review its policies to ensure it remains in compliance with the governor's order.' | not stated | Martin City Telegraph |
| Columbia Police Departmentagency statement | 2026-09-30 | ABC 17 reported that the Columbia Police Department 'declined an interview regarding Flock cameras' in a story covering the DPS ALPR guidance and Sen. Hawley's bill. | not stated | ABC 17 News (KMIZ) |
| St. Charles County Police DepartmentKevin Killeen, managing director, St. Charles County Police Department | 2026-10-01 | Paraphrase only, no direct quote: 'Kevin Killeen confirmed the use of Genetec cameras, which he said were in compliance with the governor's executive order.' | Yes | St. Louis Magazine (Sonal Churiwal) |
| University City Police Departmentagency statement (email to St. Louis Magazine) | 2026-10-01 | Asked for comment for a story on Flock concerns after the governor's order, UCPD declined, citing pending litigation, and linked to its transparency portal, which shows its existing ALPRs are still in use. | not stated | St. Louis Magazine (Sonal Churiwal) |
| Springfield Police DepartmentTad Peters, Acting Police Chief (statement to KSMU) | 2026-10-02 | Acting Chief Tad Peters said the governor's order and DPS guidance contain reasonable, best-practice parameters, that SPD already complies, and credited its 13-year ALPR program with helping cut reported stolen vehicles by nearly half over four years. | Yes | KSMU (Michele Skalicky) |
| St. Charles County Police DepartmentKurt Frisz, Chief of Police (St. Charles County government news releas | 2026-10-05 | County release 'Chief Frisz Applauds Kehoe's Executive Order on License Plate Readers' says the department's rules meet or exceed the order. It notes the department ended its Flock contract after an August audit, keeps 150-plus LPR cameras from another vendor, and requires two people (one at RIIC) plus a case number or investigative reason for every lookup. | Yes | St. Charles County government news flash |
| St. Louis County Police DepartmentJuan Cox, Chief of Police | 2026-10-05 | Asked about the department's Flock policy, the new county chief said the department was already in line with the order, praised it, and asked for common-sense legislation that keeps the tools available. | Yes | St. Louis Public Radio (Rachel Lippmann) |
Gaps: we found nothing from the Missouri Sheriffs' Association after the order, the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, the Kansas City police board or any northern Missouri agency. Several outlets (the Post-Dispatch, KSDK, FOX 4, OzarksFirst, the Jefferson City News Tribune) could not be read by our tools, so statements quoted only there are missing.
Which other states acted on plate readers in 2026, and how did police respond?
Missouri was one of at least ten states where a governor, legislature or attorney general acted in 2026. 142 of the 345 statements respond directly to a state-level action; the rest respond to council votes, misuse cases, revelations about federal or out-of-state searches, or press questions.
| State | State action | Statements | How police responded |
|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | FDOT memo issued at Gov. DeSantis's direction (31 Aug): ALPRs off state-highway right-of-way within 30 days Jax Today (31 Aug 2026) | 67 (58 agencies) | Split: 30 agencies paused, ended or removed ALPRs; 22 removed only state-road cameras and defended the rest; 6 sheriffs openly criticised the order |
| Missouri | EO 26-18 (16 Sep): 30-day deletion, no vendor resale, no facial recognition Executive Order 26-18, Missouri Secretary of State (16 Sep 2026) | 22 (11) | Supported or neutral; most said they already complied |
| Washington | SB 6002 Driver Privacy Act (signed ~30 Mar): 21-day retention limit Everett Herald (22 Apr 2026) | 11 | Split: Spokane County, Pierce County and Airway Heights switched systems off; Stanwood, Everett and Mount Vernon reactivated under the law |
| Texas | Gov. Abbott ordered state agencies to pause funding for Flock cameras (August) Dallas Express (16 Sep 2026) | 5 | Dallas cancelled 321 grant-funded cameras; El Paso halted Flock; others kept locally funded cameras |
| Virginia | 2025 law (21-day purge) and proposed 2027 ban bills | 6 (24 Virginia statements in all) | At least a dozen localities pulled away from Flock after July Cardinal News (3 Sep 2026) |
| Connecticut | Law effective 1 Oct: 21-day deletion, down from 30 WFSB (11 Aug 2026) | 4 | Chiefs described compliance and tighter sharing |
| Rhode Island | Gov. McKee ordered a State Police review and a pause on new installs (18 Aug) Boston Globe (18 Aug 2026) | 3 | Agencies described existing limits; Providence cut the number of officers with access |
| Pennsylvania | Gov. Shapiro: "I would welcome bipartisan legislation to ban these across the state" (28 Aug) Sun-Gazette / The Center Square (1 Sep 2026) | 3 | Chiefs association asked for regulation, not a ban; Abington switched vendors |
| Utah | Gov. Cox called for a review of privacy protections (Aug) KUTV (25 Aug 2026) | 2 | Tremonton-Garland ended a trial; legislative committee weighing rules |
| Arizona | AG Kris Mayes reviewing ALPR use Arizona Mirror via News From The States (25 Sep 2026) | 2 | Agencies described audits and misuse findings |
| Others | New Mexico SB 40, Colorado SB26-070 (killed), Iowa AG letter, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisiana, Nevada, Hawaii, Vermont | 17 | Mostly statements defending current practice |
The pattern differs by the kind of action. Rules that set limits (Missouri, Connecticut, Washington) mostly drew "we already comply" statements, though Washington's split shows a 21-day cap can push some sheriffs off ALPR entirely. Orders that removed cameras or money (Florida, Texas) drew sharper reactions.
Why did Florida produce the most statements?
Florida's order did not limit how data is used; it removed the cameras' permission to sit on state roads. FDOT "issued a memo Monday blocking the cameras" and said "All cameras must be removed within 30 days" Jax Today (31 Aug 2026). Many Florida agencies had most of their cameras on state roads, so the order effectively ended their programs.
- Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters went further than required: “at my direction, the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office will discontinue the use of LPR technology throughout Duval” JSO News, 2026-08-31.
- Volusia Sheriff Mike Chitwood: “The governor put us out of business” FOX 35 Orlando, 2026-08-31.
- Pinellas Sheriff Bob Gualtieri removed state-road cameras and defended the rest: “We cannot fight crime in the Stone Age” Tampa Bay 28 (WFTS), 2026-09-02.
- Charlotte Sheriff Bill Prummell: “Today the criminals are jumping up and down for joy.” WGCU, 2026-09-07
- Martin Sheriff John Budensiek said the change “makes us fundamentally less safe” WFLX/WPTV, 2026-09-01.
Sheriffs coded as openly critical of the order: Charlotte County Sheriff, Franklin County Sheriff, Liberty County Sheriff, Martin County Sheriff, Putnam County Sheriff, Volusia Sheriff. We found no statement from the Florida Sheriffs Association or the Florida Police Chiefs Association.
What do police statements affirm most often?
We coded each statement for the commitments it makes. A statement can make several. The chart counts statements, not agencies.
| Commitment in the statement | Statements | Share of 345 |
|---|---|---|
| Will keep using ALPR | 165 | 48% |
| Audits searches | 79 | 23% |
| Pausing or ending ALPR | 66 | 19% |
| Misuse is punished | 46 | 13% |
| No or limited out-of-state sharing | 45 | 13% |
| Criminal-justice use only | 40 | 12% |
| No immigration / ICE use | 38 | 11% |
| Case number logged for every search | 37 | 11% |
| Ended or paused the vendor contract | 36 | 10% |
| Wants the legislature to set rules | 32 | 9% |
| Policy update planned | 24 | 7% |
| Deletes data after 30 days | 15 | 4% |
| Turned off national lookup | 12 | 3% |
| Agency owns the data | 10 | 3% |
| Added a transparency portal | 9 | 3% |
| Vendor cannot resell or share | 8 | 2% |
| No facial recognition | 4 | 1% |
Two things stand out. First, the commitments Missouri's order made new (agency owns the data, no vendor resale, no facial recognition) are rarely volunteered elsewhere: 10, 8 and 4 statements. Second, 32 statements ask a legislature to write the rules, including from sheriffs who opposed their governor's order.
How many agencies kept, tightened or dropped plate readers?
Counting each agency once (by the strongest action it announced):
| Outcome | Agencies | Share of 294 |
|---|---|---|
| Paused, ended or removed ALPR/Flock | 91 | 31% |
| Kept ALPR, tightened rules | 36 | 12% |
| Kept ALPR, no change announced | 109 | 37% |
| Association / policy position | 16 | 5% |
| Informational / other | 34 | 12% |
| Declined to comment | 8 | 3% |
The 91 that paused or ended ALPRs are concentrated in Florida (31, mostly because cameras had to leave state roads), Virginia (15) and Wisconsin (6), where agencies dropped Flock after local pressure while saying the technology itself was useful. Several switched vendors rather than giving up plate readers, for example Abington, Pennsylvania NBC10, 2026-10-05.
How long do agencies say they keep plate data?
| Retention stated | Agencies | Share of 48 |
|---|---|---|
| 7 days | 7 | 15% |
| 14 days | 1 | 2% |
| 15 days | 1 | 2% |
| 21 days | 7 | 15% |
| 30 days | 30 | 62% |
| 90 days | 2 | 4% |
- 30 days dominates (30 of 48). It was Flock's default until 13 August 2026, when the company said data "will be kept for 7 days instead of the previous 30" unless saved under its new Evidence Mode FOX10 (13 Aug 2026).
- The new state limits cluster at 21 to 30 days: Washington 21 Everett Herald (22 Apr 2026), Connecticut 21 from 1 October WFSB (11 Aug 2026), Oregon 30 OPB (20 Aug 2026) and Missouri 30 Executive Order 26-18, Missouri Secretary of State (16 Sep 2026).
- Some agencies want longer. Besides Blue Springs, sheriffs in Alabama and Louisiana called 7 days too short (see the dataset).
Which statistics keep coming up across these statements?
We tracked every number agencies or reporters attached to these statements. These are the ones that recur, with one checked source each.
| Statistic | Example (checked) | Why it recurs |
|---|---|---|
| How many agencies search your data | New Bedford, MA: more than 300,000 searches by "thousands of agencies" in November 2025; about 27,000 searches by under 100 agencies in December after sharing was limited New Bedford Light (27 Jul 2026) | National lookup multiplies who can see local data; turning it off is the most common fix |
| One distant agency dominates | Houston police searched Lucas County, Ohio's Flock data more than 71,000 times in 30 days ABC13 Houston (19 Aug 2026); Houston made up 31% of Lake Havasu City, Arizona's searches in June 2025 Arizona Mirror via News From The States (25 Sep 2026) | Out-of-state access is invisible until someone pulls the audit log |
| Immigration-related searches | Columbus: "up to 15,577" possible immigration-related searches Ideastream (11 Jul 2026); Dayton: 7,100 search requests citing immigration WYSU (3 May 2026); Lexington: 83 of 72,336 searches for ICE or HSI Spectrum News, 2026-09-21 | Reason fields are free text, so counts are "possible" or "citing" figures |
| Misuse as a tiny share | San Francisco: 299 improper inquiries, "0.005% of inquiries over that period" FOX 5 / KTVU, 2026-06-17 | Agencies frame misuse as rare; critics note audits only catch what is logged |
| Small fleets, small budgets | Median of the 96 camera counts agencies gave: about 15. Winston, Oregon: 8 cameras for $24,000 a year OPB (20 Aug 2026) (about $3,000 a camera; our arithmetic) | Most programs are a handful of cameras in a small town |
| Case number for every search | Named as a safeguard in 37 statements; required by Missouri's order Executive Order 26-18, Missouri Secretary of State (16 Sep 2026) | The fix agencies reach for first after a misuse case |
| Flock's own figures | Flock's 2025 Impact Census: "supported more than 1 million investigations", "assisted in solving 20% of cleared cases", "helped locate more than 10,000 missing persons" Sun-Gazette / The Center Square (1 Sep 2026) | Vendor claims, repeated in coverage and by agencies; not independently verified |
Numbers we saw repeated but could not check against a readable source (for example, the Washington Post's count of officers accused of misuse, which outlets cite anywhere from about 50 to about 70) are left out of this table. They remain in the dataset with the article that cited them.
What phrases do agencies keep using?
- "Force multiplier", used by small departments with few officers: Stanwood, Washington “As a small city with limited staffing, Flock cameras act as a force multiplier” Everett Herald, 2026-04-01.
- "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater", the standard defence after a misuse case: Pinellas Sheriff Gualtieri “We don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater because a few people did something stupid” Tampa Bay 28 (WFTS), 2026-09-02.
- "Public trust", the usual reason for pausing: Lynchburg, Virginia Chief Ken Edwards “there's no amount of technology out there that is worth the expense of public trust” Cardinal News, 2026-09-03.
- "Our data is ours", from agencies that never joined national sharing: Lansing, Michigan Chief Robert Backus “Our data is ours” WKAR, 2026-08-25.
National groups use the same frame. A joint statement from ten organisations including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and the National Sheriffs' Association said “Misuse of ALPR technology - like misuse of any law enforcement investigative tool - should not be tolerated.” NSA-hosted joint statement PDF, 2026-08-25 The Police Executive Research Forum: “Clearly, we should not abandon this valuable technology.” PERF Trending, 2026-10-10
How we built this dataset, and its limits
- Scope. Public statements by US law-enforcement agencies, officials and associations, 1 January to 10 October 2026, that state, defend or change ALPR policy. One row per agency per distinct statement.
- Collection. Seven research passes on 10 October 2026 by state and region, reading agency releases, council records and news coverage. Every source was opened and read; nothing was taken from search snippets. Facebook posts are included only when a news outlet quoted them.
- Coding. Each row records the trigger, stance, compliance claim, vendor, camera count, retention, the commitments made, concerns and every number cited. Stance and outcome are our coding from the statement's own words.
- Quotes. The 30 quotes used on this page were re-checked word for word against the source. Other quotes in the dataset are as captured, sometimes as fragments joined with "…"; check the linked source before quoting them.
- Not a census. Statements that reach the news are over-represented, and Florida is over-represented because its order forced every affected agency to respond. Paywalled or blocked outlets (including the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and KSDK) could not be read, and we found nothing in Montana or New Hampshire. Treat counts as "at least".
Related: what candidates have said about ALPRs, ALPR cameras by state, the Flock guide and how to request your city's ALPR audit logs.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Missouri Executive Order 26-18?
An order Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe signed on 16 September 2026 setting minimum rules for automated license plate readers used by state agencies and state-funded local police: delete data within 30 days unless tied to an active investigation or emergency, the agency owns the data, vendors cannot sell or share it, no facial recognition, every search logged with a case number, and penalties for misuse. It lasts until the legislature passes a law.
Did any Missouri police agency oppose EO 26-18?
We found none. All 22 Missouri law-enforcement statements we collected supported the order or described it neutrally, and most said the agency already complied. The one concern raised, that 30 days is sometimes not long enough for investigations, came from the Blue Springs police chief two days before the order was signed.
Which agencies changed anything because of the Missouri order?
St. Louis County Police cut retention from 90 to 30 days. Columbia Police said it was obtaining the new vendor deletion certification. Kansas City police said it would review policies and adjust data retention without saying what it had been. Most others said no change was needed.
How many police agencies stopped using license plate readers in 2026?
In our dataset, 91 of 294 agencies and groups announced that they paused, ended or removed ALPRs or their Flock contract, and 145 said they would keep using them. Florida accounts for 31 of the 91, largely because a state order forced cameras off state roads. These counts cover statements we found, not every agency in the country.
How long do police keep license plate reader data?
The most common period agencies stated was 30 days, given by 30 of the 48 agencies that named a number. Flock changed its default from 30 days to 7 days on 13 August 2026. New state limits include 21 days in Washington and Connecticut and 30 days in Oregon and under Missouri's order.
What did Florida order about license plate readers?
The Florida Department of Transportation issued a memo on 31 August 2026, at Governor DeSantis's direction, revoking permission for ALPRs on state-highway right-of-way and giving agencies 30 days to remove them. It did not regulate cameras on local roads, so some agencies removed only state-road cameras while others ended their programs.
Can I download the data?
Yes. The full dataset of statements is available on this page as CSV and JSON, with the agency, date, speaker, trigger, stance, retention, commitments, numbers cited and source links for every row. It is free to reuse with a link back.
Are the quotes in the dataset exact?
The quotes shown on this page were checked word for word against their sources on 10 October 2026. Other quotes in the dataset are as captured from the source and are sometimes fragments joined with an ellipsis, so check the linked article before quoting them.