Get Involved

Automated Resident Data Collection

Overland Park police use cameras that automatically record information about every vehicle that passes, not just vehicles connected to a crime. These tools help find stolen cars, solve serious crimes, and locate missing people. That matters, and we want our officers to have good tools.

Read Our Proposal Read the Research

How Long Plate Data Is Kept

30 days

Data is now kept for 30 days instead of a year.

Rule Changes and Council Votes

In 2026 it changed twice, and the City Council voted on neither change.

Seattle Searches With No Reason Given

47%

In Seattle, Washington, the city's Inspector General reviewed police plate searches on Axon's platform, the same one Overland Park uses. About 47% of Seattle's 2025 searches had no reason given.

Valuable Tools Need Durable Rules

But the more data a city collects and keeps about everyone, the more important it is to ask who sets the rules for using it.

Why we're starting with rules →

How We Got Here

A new Real-Time Information Center, a national reckoning over plate readers, and a stronger local policy taught us that the problem was never one company, one camera, or one building. It's how much data about residents gets collected, how long it's kept, and who decides.

We took this on because it touches everyone who lives or works here, and because rules that affect every resident should be set where residents have a say: by the City Council, in public.

Read the full story →

What We Mean

Automated resident data collection is any system that automatically records, identifies, or describes people or vehicles without individual suspicion, and keeps that information searchable.

License plate readers are the clearest example today. But the technology matters less than the data.

Why the data matters →

Where We Draw the Line

Watching live during an emergency is different from building a searchable history of everyone.

Our concern starts when data is kept and searched long after, or repurposed to identify people it was never collected to track. Those decisions should belong to elected officials.

Read more →

Where Overland Park Stands

In October 2026, the Overland Park Police Department adopted a stronger license plate reader policy. Data is now kept for 30 days instead of a year. Facial recognition is prohibited. Every search requires a case number and a specific reason. Data sharing with other agencies is paused until formal agreements are in place.

That's real progress, and Chief Doreen Jokerst and her team deserve credit for it.

Everything that changed →
February Proposal, October Policy

A Win for Everyone

In February, we published a governance proposal for the Real-Time Information Center. In October, the police department's new license plate reader policy put several of the same protections in place.

That's worth celebrating. Residents asked questions and spoke up. Council members pressed for answers. Chief Doreen Jokerst and her team listened and acted. We'd like to think our proposal helped, but this took many voices, and that's the point: it's what a city looks like when it works through a hard question together.

It also shows these protections work here. The next step is making them last.

  • 30 daysThe data limit we proposed is now policy
  • No facial recognitionProhibited, as we proposed
  • A reason for every searchA case number and a specific reason, as we proposed
  • Protected activitiesFree speech and religious activity are off-limits, as we proposed
See What Was Adopted → Read the February Proposal

What's Still Missing

Seven gaps, each a question about who decides.

The Rules Can Change Without a Vote The Department Audits Itself Shared Data May Not Stay Protected Not Every Camera Follows the Same Rules No Vendor Is the Safe Choice Collected Data Can Be Breached Residents Can't Check for Themselves

What We're Asking For

Rules for automated resident data collection set by elected officials, so they hold no matter the vendor, the technology, or who leads the department.

Read the Research Read Our Proposal →
  • Council approval for rule changes, expansions, and new capabilities
  • Independent review of how the data is searched
  • Minimum standards for any agency we share data with
  • The same standards for every camera police can access
  • Data collected for one purpose isn't repurposed to identify people without Council approval
  • Rules that cover data from any city department, not just the police
  • Regular public reporting on how these systems are used, without plate numbers or personal information

Privacy Policy

Last updated: October 14, 2026

Overland Park Voice ("we") runs opvoice.org. This explains what the site collects and why.

Information We Collect

We collect as little as we can. We don't use cookies, ad trackers, or tracking pixels, and we don't build profiles of visitors. The only personal information we get is what you choose to send us.

Sign-Up Form

If you use the sign-up form on our site, we receive:

  • Your name
  • Your email address
  • Your message, if you add one

We use these only to reply to you and to send the updates you asked for.

Site Analytics

We count visits with GoatCounter, an open-source analytics service built for privacy. It's fully anonymized. It records which page was viewed, the referring site, your browser and screen size, and your country. It doesn't use cookies or store your IP address, and it can't identify you or follow you across other sites. We use these counts only to see which pages people read.

Our Web Host

Like any website, our host keeps standard server logs under its own policy. We don't use them to identify visitors.

How We Use Information

  • Replying to you: we use what you send through the form to answer you.
  • Improving the site: anonymous visit counts tell us what's useful and what's broken.

We never sell, rent, or share your personal information for marketing.

Third-Party Services

  • GoatCounter (gc.zgo.at): the anonymized visit counts described above.
  • Formspree (formspree.io): handles the sign-up form and forwards submissions to our email. We don't store form data on the website.
  • Google Fonts (fonts.googleapis.com): serves the site's typeface. Your browser contacts Google to load it.
  • Tailwind CSS (cdn.tailwindcss.com): serves the site's styling.
  • Chart.js (cdn.jsdelivr.net): draws the charts on our housing research page.

Social Media

We link to our accounts on Facebook, Instagram (@op.voice), Reddit (r/OverlandParkVoice) and YouTube (@VOICEofOP). Those platforms have their own privacy practices, which we don't control.

Data Security

The site uses HTTPS encryption, and form submissions go to Formspree's secure servers. No method of sending data over the internet is completely secure, but we keep what we hold to a minimum.

Data Retention

  • Form messages: we delete them when they're no longer needed to reply to you or send the updates you asked for.
  • Visit counts: kept as anonymous totals.

Your Rights

You can ask what personal information we hold about you, and ask us to correct it, delete it, or stop contacting you. Email us and we'll take care of it.

Contact Us

  • Email: overlandpark.voice@gmail.com

We aim to reply within 5 business days.

OP Voice Transparency

AI Use Policy

How We Use AI in Our Research and Writing

Updated: October 2026

Scope: All OP Voice research, policy drafting, and community projects

Objective: Ensuring human judgment remains the foundation of civic advocacy

Part I

Why This Exists

As a one-person organization juggling a full-time job and serious policy work, efficiency is a necessity. However, if we demand transparency from the City on their AI use, we owe you the same.

Core Principles:

  • 1.
    Authenticity Over Polish: AI helps me be more thorough, but it never replaces the reading or the judgment.
  • 2.
    Transparency as Default: If AI contributed significantly to a piece of work, we disclose it.
  • 3.
    Human-in-the-Loop: AI can surface patterns, but humans make the call on what matters.

Part II

How the Work Actually Happens

Step 1: Human Research & Analysis

Every project starts with reading actual documents: city contracts, vendor policies, ordinances, and investigative reporting. I form my own hypotheses and arguments from this research foundation. AI never sees a blank slate; it sees work I've already started.

Step 2: Using AI to Cover Gaps

AI tools are used to find sources I might have missed, identify logical holes, and synthesize patterns across multiple documents. All AI-surfaced sources get verified independently. We use multiple AI systems to avoid vendor lock-in.

Step 3: Red-Teaming & Stress-Testing

Before committing to a position publicly, I use AI to find the strongest counter-arguments. This helps identify vulnerabilities before they reach the City Attorney or Council. If red-teaming reveals a weak position, I change or abandon it.

Part III

The Red-Teaming Practice

Red-teaming is the most valuable way I use AI. It's brutally honest feedback without social pressure.

The Red-Team Protocol: What We Ask

"What's the strongest case against this?"

Finding the counter-perspectives early.

"What am I assuming that I shouldn't?"

Exposing blind spots in our logic.

"Where is this most vulnerable to criticism?"

Strengthening the evidentiary base.

"How would city staff oppose this?"

Preparing for the real-world debate.

Part IV

Verification & Disclosure

Section 1: The Human Verification Standard

This mirrors our February 2026 RTIC governance proposal. Just as OPPD shouldn't take enforcement action based solely on an AI alert, OP Voice doesn't publish AI analysis without human verification.

Claims verified vs original sources
Tested against lived experience
Judgment on community needs
Tone edited for authenticity

Section 2: Clear Disclosure Requirements

Disclosure is required for research posts where AI helped find sources, policy documents with AI assisted structure, or any content where AI contribution was substantial.

"Research conducted by OP Voice, gaps filled and verified with AI assistance. Draft organized with AI tools, substantially edited for accuracy and voice."

Part V

Accountability When AI Gets It Wrong

No verification process is perfect. If AI-assisted research leads to an error in published work, our response is human-centered:

Public Correction

We correct it with the same visibility as the original post, explaining what went wrong (bad source, flawed synthesis, verification gap).

Human Accountability

We don't hide behind "the AI got it wrong." The human verified it. The human published it. The accountability is 100% human.

What This Means for Readers

When you read an OP Voice research post, the sourcing is real. I've read the contracts, the ordinances, and the vendor policies myself.

Where AI shows up is in the gaps: flagging a case I hadn't found, catching a logical inconsistency, or helping organize 30 pages of research into something readable. The positions, the framing, and the decision to publish are mine.

If something seems off or you want to see the underlying sources, ask. That's the whole point.

This policy is a living document, evolved through community feedback and technical changes.

© 2026 Overland Park Voice

Visit opvoice.org for more information