Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges Middleton to end use of Flock ALPR cameras, cites privacy and security risks
Summary
A Middleton resident asked the council to terminate the city's contract with Flock or adopt an ordinance banning ALPR cameras, saying the company’s system creates searchable vehicle “digital fingerprints” and can be misused; the council heard the concern during public comment but took no immediate action.
Garrett Gabatista, a Middleton resident, urged the Common Council to end the city’s use of Flock automatic license-plate reader (ALPR) cameras or adopt an ordinance restricting them, telling the council the technology poses a significant privacy and security risk.
Gabatista said the system does more than read plates. “Flock advertises that their system creates a digital fingerprint of every car, including make, model, color, dents, bumper stickers, everything,” he told the council, adding that the system can identify and track vehicles even without a visible license plate and is centrally searchable.
He said that centralized, easily accessed records make the system more invasive than ordinary private security cameras and increase the risk of misuse. “One bad actor or one compromised password can turn Flock into a weapon that can ruin lives,” Gabatista said, and he asked the council either to terminate Middleton’s contract with Flock or to pursue an ordinance barring ALPR cameras.
Gabatista referenced another nearby municipal action, saying Verona recently voted to terminate its contract with Flock after public concern. He asked Middleton’s council to consider the same course or to impose restrictions if termination is not within the council’s authority.
The council did not act on Gabatista’s request during the meeting; public comment concluded and the council moved to scheduled proclamations and agenda business. Mayor Emily Cune and council members thanked the speaker for raising the issue and did not indicate an immediate staff follow-up during the meeting.
What’s next: Council members or staff could place the matter on a future agenda for more information or direct staff to report on contract terms and legal authority to limit ALPR use. The meeting record does not show a directive or timetable for such follow-up.
