Flock Camera Map by State: All 50 States Directory
Welcome to the Flock Camera Map by State directory, documenting over 140,815 verified automated license plate readers across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Approximately 81.0% of all documented units are confirmed Flock Safety Falcon devices. Pick any state below to view interactive GIS maps, municipal agency adoption, and state-level statutory retention laws, or explore the nationwide Flock Camera Locations Master Registry.
Verified roadside locations
114,038 confirmed units
Complete US territorial audit
21,800 mapped units
State-by-State Surveillance Trends: The National ALPR Landscape
The expansion of automated license plate readers across the United States has not been uniform. High-population states with expansive suburban highway networks—such as California, Texas, Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina—feature dense municipal "surveillance rings" where vehicles passing between neighboring jurisdictions are continuously cataloged.
In contrasting jurisdictions—such as Maine, New Hampshire, and Montana—state legislatures have enacted rigorous statutory safeguards or outright bans on automated red light and speed cameras, establishing stricter standards for how long non-investigative plate reads may be retained by police.
Top 10 States by Documented Camera Deployment Volume
The ten states below account for more than 65% of all community-documented automated license plate readers across the United States.
| Rank | State | Total Cameras | Flock Safety Share | Top Documented Operator | State Hub |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | California (CA) | 21,800 | 79.9% | San Diego Police Department | View CA Map → |
| #2 | Texas (TX) | 15,941 | 91.6% | Flock Safety | View TX Map → |
| #3 | Georgia (GA) | 10,167 | 92.4% | Flock Safety | View GA Map → |
| #4 | Illinois (IL) | 9,394 | 77.3% | Flock Safety | View IL Map → |
| #5 | Florida (FL) | 9,197 | 77.2% | Volusia County Sheriff's Office | View FL Map → |
| #6 | Ohio (OH) | 6,613 | 90.7% | Flock Safety | View OH Map → |
| #7 | Michigan (MI) | 5,565 | 84.4% | Detroit Police Department | View MI Map → |
| #8 | North Carolina (NC) | 5,114 | 87.8% | Lowe's | View NC Map → |
| #9 | Indiana (IN) | 4,495 | 93% | Louisville Metro Police Department | View IN Map → |
| #10 | New Jersey (NJ) | 4,328 | 38.6% | NYC Department of Transportation | View NJ Map → |
All 50 States & Territories Directory
Showing 51 of 51 jurisdictions
California
Statute: Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.90.5 et seq. (SB 34); mandates strict ALPR privacy policy, usage audits, public disclosure, and prohibits sharing data out-of-state for non-qualifying purposes.
Texas
Statute: Tex. Transp. Code § 707 (banned red light cameras); ALPR governed under Tex. Gov't Code § 411 and local police policies; high density across Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, and Austin.
Georgia
Statute: O.C.G.A. § 35-1-22; strict statutory cap of 30-day retention for non-hit ALPR scans; requires explicit warrant/investigative log for queries.
Illinois
Statute: 625 ILCS 5/11-208.7; expressway camera act and municipal ordinances require registration and prohibit sharing with out-of-state entities for immigration or reproductive care inquiries.
Florida
Statute: Fla. Stat. § 316.0777 & § 316.0778; restricts ALPR data access to active criminal investigations and requires strict data destruction cycles (typically 30–90 days).
Ohio
Statute: Ohio Rev. Code § 4511.093; regulation of automated traffic cameras; Flock ALPR deployments active across Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Dayton.
Michigan
Statute: Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.627; high urban deployment across Detroit, Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids; municipal policies typically set 30-day retention.
North Carolina
Statute: N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-183.30; limits ALPR data retention to 90 days for unflagged data unless connected to active criminal matter; mandates annual audit.
Indiana
Statute: Ind. Code § 9-21-3.5; authorizes ALPR on state highways and local roads for public safety with standard local retention policies.
New Jersey
Statute: N.J. Attorney General Directive 2022-12; limits ALPR retention to 5 years, requires quarterly compliance audits, and prohibits automated speeding ticketing.
Alabama
Statute: Ala. Code § 32-5A (General Traffic); no statewide cap on non-warrant ALPR retention; individual municipal ordinances govern local PD usage.
New York
Statute: N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 50-a; NYPD and NY State Police deploy extensive ALPR networks; public records transparency governed under FOIL.
Louisiana
Statute: La. Stat. Ann. § 32:41; widespread sheriff and municipal adoption with cloud data retention periods between 30 and 365 days.
Arizona
Statute: Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-1201 et seq.; law enforcement agencies retain ALPR data with municipal retention guidelines (typically 30 to 180 days).
Colorado
Statute: Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-301; ALPR records subject to Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) with municipal retention policies (typically 1 to 3 years).
Virginia
Statute: Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-1716.1; allows ALPR for active criminal investigations; Supreme Court of Virginia Neal v. Fairfax County decision affirmed limits on indefinite retention of unflagged plate data.
Kansas
Statute: Kan. Stat. Ann. § 22-4701; Criminal Justice Information standards apply to municipal ALPR databases.
Arkansas
Statute: Ark. Code Ann. § 12-12-1803; limits ALPR data retention to 150 days unless part of active criminal investigation.
Pennsylvania
Statute: 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3369; limits automated enforcement zones; PA State Police ALPR guidelines regulate non-hit data destruction.
Washington
Statute: Wash. Rev. Code § 46.63.170; limits automated cameras to designated safety corridors; municipal ALPR policies require strict query logging.
Minnesota
Statute: Minn. Stat. § 13.824; statutory cap of 60 days on unflagged ALPR data; requires biennial independent audits and public notice before deploying.
Oklahoma
Statute: Okla. Stat. tit. 47 § 11-1401; Oklahoma Uninsured Vehicle Enforcement Diversion (UVED) program uses ALPR; municipal retention rules apply.
Maryland
Statute: Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 3-509; requires law enforcement audit logs, prohibits selling data, and mandates annual reporting to the General Assembly.
Tennessee
Statute: Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-302; requires prominent public signage for automated camera systems; Flock deployments widespread in Nashville, Memphis, Chattanooga.
Missouri
Statute: Mo. Rev. Stat. § 610.100 (Sunshine Law); extensive deployment across St. Louis County, Kansas City, and St. Charles; municipal retention ranges from 30 to 180 days.
Massachusetts
Statute: Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 66 § 10; public records guidelines apply; State Police policy limits unflagged data retention to 1 year.
New Mexico
Statute: N.M. Stat. Ann. § 14-2-1 (Inspection of Public Records Act); Albuquerque PD maintains major network with local retention policies.
Kentucky
Statute: Ky. Rev. Stat. § 61.870 (Kentucky Open Records Act); municipal retention policies average 60 to 90 days.
Connecticut
Statute: Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-279a et seq.; municipal guidelines require strict auditing of queries and secure cloud transmission.
Utah
Statute: Utah Code Ann. § 41-6a-2003; strictly limits ALPR retention to 9 months for government agencies, prohibits selling data, and requires strict audit logs.
Iowa
Statute: Iowa Code § 321.48; prohibits unauthorized automated traffic ticketing; ALPR for criminal investigation authorized under Iowa DPS guidelines.
Oregon
Statute: Or. Rev. Stat. § 181A.250; limits law enforcement ALPR retention to 30 days unless subject to ongoing criminal investigation.
Delaware
Statute: Del. Code tit. 11 § 8501; Delaware State Police maintains statewide ALPR network with audit logs.
Idaho
Statute: Idaho Code § 49-245; prohibits automated traffic enforcement without human review; ALPR investigative databases regulated under public records law.
South Carolina
Statute: S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-6520; prohibits automated red light/speed cameras; ALPR usage restricted to active law enforcement investigations.
Nebraska
Statute: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-6,298; limits ALPR data retention to 180 days unless involved in a specific investigation; requires annual audit.
District of Columbia
Statute: D.C. Code § 5-133.21; Metropolitan Police Department ALPR data retention policy set at 90 days for non-hit scans.
Mississippi
Statute: Miss. Code Ann. § 45-1-1; Mississippi Department of Public Safety and municipal police departments govern local retention schedules.
North Dakota
Statute: N.D. Cent. Code § 39-03-09; law enforcement ALPR databases regulated under state criminal justice guidelines.
Hawaii
Statute: Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F; Uniform Information Practices Act governs municipal surveillance transparency.
Maine
Statute: Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29-A § 2117-A; limits ALPR retention to 21 days for unflagged scans; prohibits commercial use and requires strict access logs.
Wyoming
Statute: Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-5-103; municipal police departments adhere to standard state public records guidelines.
New Hampshire
Statute: N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 261:75-b; strictly bans automated license plate readers on public roads except for narrow law enforcement exceptions.
West Virginia
Statute: W. Va. Code § 17C-6-7a; prohibits automated photo traffic ticketing; ALPR for criminal investigation authorized under state police oversight.
Montana
Statute: Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-117; prohibits government surveillance technology on private citizens without warrant or specific statutory authority.
South Dakota
Statute: S.D. Codified Laws § 32-33-1; municipal guidelines govern traffic surveillance.
Alaska
Statute: Alaska Stat. § 12.36 (Criminal Justice Information); privacy protected under Alaska Constitution Art. I § 22.
Nevada
Statute: Nev. Rev. Stat. § 484A.600; heavy deployment across Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) and Reno with municipal auditing protocols.
Rhode Island
Statute: R.I. Gen. Laws § 31-41.2; school zone and traffic monitoring guidelines apply.
Vermont
Statute: 23 V.S.A. § 1607; limits ALPR data retention to 18 months, requires annual reporting to legislature, and mandates strict criminal justice purpose for all queries.
Wisconsin
Statute: Wis. Stat. § 349.02; limits automated enforcement without officer involvement; Milwaukee and suburban police departments utilize Flock ALPR under local department retention rules.
State Directory Frequently Asked Questions
How state jurisdictions regulate automated license plate readers.