Bend should disclose which retail cameras are connected to Bend Connect
Bend Police, in partnership with the Deschutes County District Attorney’s Office, offered up to ten Bend retailers grant-funded FususCore device bundles that can connect existing store security cameras into Bend Connect, the police-accessible camera platform used by Bend Police.
That should be public information.
This is not a claim that every Bend retailer is using facial recognition, license plate readers, or every surveillance tool listed in its corporate privacy policy. Corporate privacy policies show what a company reserves the right to collect or process under certain circumstances. They do not prove that a specific Bend store is using a specific technology today.
The local issue is narrower:
Which private retail cameras are connected to Bend Connect / FususCore, and what rules govern police access to those feeds?
Here is why I think this matters.
Bend has already had a major public conversation about automated license plate readers. In January, City Council voted to suspend the Flock cameras after public concern. That showed that public input matters. But the retail-camera integration pathway has not received the same level of scrutiny, even though it may create a similar concern through a different door: private cameras, public access.
The architecture also matters. Connect Bend is branded as a local public-safety program, but the Connect Bend site footer says “Powered by Axon” and “©2026 Axon Enterprise, Inc.” The Privacy FAQ says people who want to adjust or delete registry information should contact a Fusus email address: connect@fusus.com. That does not automatically mean the program is unlawful or abusive. It does mean residents deserve a clear answer about who controls the data, who can access it, and what rules apply.
The same Privacy FAQ says Fusus does not employ or integrate facial recognition technology, but it also says Fusus uses AI to rapidly search video and may automatically recognize weapons and “vehicles of interest.” That raises an obvious question: what vehicle-search, vehicle-identification, ALPR, or similar capabilities are available through the platform, and are any of them active in Bend-connected retail feeds?
The local scale is already significant. In March, The Bulletin reported that Connect Bend had 618 registered cameras and 174 integrated cameras. The same article reported that officers had sent 14 community requests over the prior year and that a BPD spokesperson was not aware of any suspect video footage produced from those requests.
Separately, I reviewed public privacy policies and disclosures for six major retailers with Bend-area locations: Lowe’s, Home Depot, Walmart, Fred Meyer/Kroger, Safeway/Albertsons, and Albertsons’ California ALPR policy.
Their public policies disclose some combination of:
- store and parking-lot video surveillance
- automated license plate recognition policies, in some cases
- biometric or facial-recognition-related collection in some locations or states
- in-store Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, device, or location tracking
- mobile-app geolocation
- website/app behavioral analytics, including cursor, keystroke, scroll, or session-replay tracking in some policies
- inferences and profiling
- law-enforcement sharing language
Again: this does not prove that every Bend location uses every one of these tools. Bend-specific deployment is still unverified. That is exactly the point.
If the City is helping integrate private retail cameras into Bend Connect / FususCore, the public should not have to guess:
- Which businesses are connected?
- Which cameras or camera feeds are integrated?
- How long is footage retained?
- Who at Bend Police can access it?
- Are all searches logged and audited?
- Can footage or metadata be shared with other Oregon agencies, federal agencies, out-of-state agencies, or private third parties?
- Do any integrated feeds include ALPR, face recognition, biometric analysis, AI vehicle search, object detection, or other video analytics?
- What public notice was given before these integrations happened?
SB 1516 makes this more urgent. Oregon’s new ALPR law took effect immediately because it included an emergency clause. The law requires agencies to establish and publish ALPR policies before deploying or using ALPR systems or captured plate data, requires vendor audits, limits vendor access/use/disclosure of captured plate data, and allows civil actions against vendors for improper access, disclosure, sale, sharing, or use of captured plate data. It also says that any ALPR system purchased through the Organized Retail Theft Grant Program must comply with the new statewide ALPR framework.
That matters because the retail-camera bundle program was funded through the Organized Retail Theft Grant Program. If any grant-funded retail integration includes ALPR or ALPR-like functionality, the City should explain how it complies with SB 1516.
Oregon residents also have another tool: the Oregon Consumer Privacy Act. Under OCPA, you can ask a covered company whether it processes your personal data, request a copy of that data, and request a list of specific third parties to whom personal data has been disclosed. Companies generally have 45 days to respond. OCPA does not let consumers sue directly; enforcement goes through the Oregon Attorney General. But the responses can still create a record of what companies say they are doing.
The City can also be asked through Oregon public records requests for the contracts, grant records, retailer applications, training materials, retention rules, audit logs, and communications related to Bend Connect / FususCore retail integrations.
My ask is simple:
Before any more private cameras are integrated into a police-accessible system, Bend should publish the list of participating businesses, the access rules, the retention rules, the audit rules, and the limits on sharing.
This is not anti-retailer and it is not anti-accountability. Stores have legitimate security concerns. Police have legitimate reasons to investigate serious crimes. But public-private camera networks should not grow quietly through grants, vendor platforms, and private agreements without public disclosure.
A store camera that only a store can access is one thing.
A store camera connected to a police-accessible surveillance platform is something else.
Bend residents deserve to know which is which.
I’m sharing this as working public-interest research from the Bend Privacy Alliance. Corrections are welcome. The goal is not to accuse any specific store of using a specific technology without evidence. The goal is to get Bend to disclose what private cameras are connected to public surveillance infrastructure, and what safeguards apply.
More detail, sources, and templates:
Posted Jun 10, 2026, 4:31 PM UTC