Two online speakers used the public‑comment period at the Mountlake Terrace City Council meeting on Sept. 18 to urge the council not to proceed with planned Flock surveillance cameras and to instead direct pandemic‑era funds to public‑health measures.

“After all the legitimate and serious concerns residents have raised, after all the lies Flock has been caught in, after learning Flock’s history of corruption and working with ICE, how can you still seriously be planning on installing these cameras?” said an online speaker who identified himself as Adam. He asked the council how it would respond if the company shared data with federal immigration authorities and warned that people could be “plucked from their homes and shipped off to be held indefinitely.” Adam also stressed regional COVID‑19 infection rates and argued the city should spend on masks, HEPA purifiers and other public‑health tools instead of surveillance systems.

A second online commenter, identified as Jillian, said she walks in the community and questioned the incremental safety benefit of a municipal camera system when many residents already use private cameras such as Ring. “If a company has already lied to you, why would you keep doing business with them?” she asked, saying the council should reevaluate the contract and consider whether oversight requirements mean the company should not be used.

No council member took action on the comments during the meeting; the remarks were part of the public‑comment period and will be part of the public record. Council members thanked the commentators for speaking and acknowledged the concerns. The transcript shows council members Erin Murray, Steve Woodard and William Page had earlier expressed reservations about Flock in prior meetings, and commenters singled them out for praise during public comment. The city did not respond with a policy decision at the Sept. 18 meeting.