Surveillance procurement
7 documents on file, spanning 2019–2024. The chain below starts with the original agreement; each document beneath it shows what it changed.
What the governing body was told before it voted, what it actually enacted, and what was signed — term by term. Click any value to read the passage it came from. A row marked silent is not a disagreement: it means only some of the three sources address that term at all, which is a different criticism and sometimes a fairer one.
| Term | Staff report | Enactment | Contract | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data retention | Agree | |||
| Plate readers | — | Agree | ||
| Annual cost | Agree | |||
| Addresses data sharing | Agree | |||
| Sharing with others | — | Agree | ||
| Addresses federal access | Agree |
No source addresses: total cost, term, renews automatically. Neither the briefing, the enactment nor the agreement puts these on the record.
| Term | Staff report | Enactment | Contract | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data retention | — | Agree | ||
| Addresses data sharing | — | Agree | ||
| Sharing with others | — | Agree | ||
| Addresses federal access | — | Agree |
No source addresses: plate readers, total cost, annual cost, term, renews automatically. Neither the briefing, the enactment nor the agreement puts these on the record.
Not on file: enactment. No ordinance or resolution authorising this contract has been located, so what the governing body approved cannot be compared against what was signed. That is a statement about the record we hold, not a finding that no vote occurred.
| Term | Staff report | Enactment | Contract | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data retention | — | — | Silent |
No source addresses: plate readers, total cost, annual cost, term, renews automatically, addresses data sharing, sharing with others, addresses federal access. Neither the briefing, the enactment nor the agreement puts these on the record.
Not on file: staff report, enactment. No ordinance or resolution authorising this contract has been located, so what the governing body approved cannot be compared against what was signed. That is a statement about the record we hold, not a finding that no vote occurred.
| Term | Staff report | Enactment | Contract | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Addresses data sharing | — | — | Silent |
No source addresses: data retention, plate readers, total cost, annual cost, term, renews automatically, sharing with others, addresses federal access. Neither the briefing, the enactment nor the agreement puts these on the record.
6 systems named in this jurisdiction’s procurement documents, 5 of which are documented as integrating with FlockOS. Plate readers are one layer; what a camera network is worth to an agency depends on what it is plugged into.
“ated infrared cameras, however the proposed fleet-wide deployment will utilize dashcams (Axon Fleet 3 cameras paired with Axon Fleet Hub software platform) to record and analyze license pl”the document
“ing Enforcement Officers’ continued use of and accept the SIR and Executive Overview for Genetec’s AutoVu Automated License Plate Reader hardware. The SIR states that all rules and poli”the document
“r of the public would.” 8 “Mark43” appears to refer to SPD’s records management system. 4. CopLogic Page 19 of 23 Tabl”the document
“e Plate Readers, which employ a combination of high definition infrared digital cameras (Neology PIPs ) and locational software (Neology Back Office System Software, or “BOSS”). SPD use”the document
“ide for a Woman Who Got an Abortion, 404 media, May 2025 2 Leaving the Door Wide Open: Flock Surveillance Systems Expose Washington Data to Immigration Enforcement, University of Wa”the document
“on this is what I imagine will be a taxpayer burden when the council just pushed through ShotSpotter. This kind of expansion of the SPD's power can only end in tears and bloodshed. 63 Ret”the document
These are the systems named in the procurement documents we hold. A system listed here was written down in a document this jurisdiction published; that is not the same as a finding that the jurisdiction operates it, and a system missing from this list may simply have been bought under an item we have not read.
A gap means the record was not found on the jurisdiction's public portal. It is not a statement that the record does not exist, and it is not a statement about whether the jurisdiction operates ALPR.
Source portal: https://seattle.legistar.com. Last swept 2026-08-31.