# Charles Finkenbinder City Attorney for the [[City of Conway]]. He was copied on the 2026-05-22 appeal of [[Conway Police Department]] file `PD-2026-477`, received Major [[Clayton Smith]]'s May 26 draft request for an Arkansas Attorney General opinion, and reviewed CPD's July Flock FOIA response chains. The produced record contains his July 24 analysis that the cited ALPR provisions did not appear to protect records showing government access to ALPR data and that requests 760-763 did not appear exempt under the provisions CPD cited ([[City Attorney Review of ALPR Records Requests]], `doc16993720260803100106.pdf`, p. 5). ## Roles in this corpus - **Reviewer of the draft Attorney General request.** Smith's May 26 email was captioned "attached draft opinion request for your review" ([[Draft Attorney General Opinion Request and Routing]], `doc16993620260803100035.pdf`, p. 1). Finkenbinder later wrote that he saw no issue with the proposed request but that it did not have to come from the City Attorney (`doc16993720260803100106.pdf`, p. 1). - **City legal reviewer for the July Flock FOIA responses.** His July 24 email distinguishes privacy protection for the person whose data were recorded from records of government access and says FOIA doubt tips toward disclosure ([[City Attorney Review of ALPR Records Requests]], p. 5). He reserved revision pending a system demonstration and left other exemptions and record-creation issues open. - **Participant sought for the July 27 meeting.** Smith asked him to meet with Smith and Chief [[Chris Harris]] "in reference to the Flock FOIA" ([[July 27 Flock FOIA Meeting Text]]). ## Notes - The draft opinion request's signature block labels Finkenbinder "Prosecuting Attorney" (`doc16993620260803100035.pdf`, p. 9), while his correspondence signature identifies him as "Conway City Attorney" (`doc16993720260803100106.pdf`, p. 1). The draft label is a documentary anomaly, not proof that he held or invoked a prosecuting-attorney office. - Finkenbinder stated in Gmail message `19fc8defe5e39d18` that his office did not request an Attorney General opinion. The seven-file production contains no external transmittal, acknowledgment, opinion, or response. - His July 24 analysis and CPD's July 25 contrary reading are tracked at [[T046 - Conway City Attorney Disclosure Advice vs CPD Categorical ALPR Audit Withholding]]; the final City position is not documented.