Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Surveillance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge caution on Flock surveillance cameras; others raise firefighter residency concerns
Summary
During citizens-to-be-heard, a City of Erie resident warned supervisors about privacy and security risks posed by Flock Safety cameras, contrasting them with traditional ALPRs; other speakers questioned firefighter residency policies and asked whether residency requirements should be considered for hires.
Several residents addressed the board during the citizens‑to‑be‑heard portion on March 24, raising privacy concerns about proposed Flock Safety cameras and questions about residency for township firefighters.
Caleb Sundance (City of Erie) told the board he had met with township officials and urged caution before deploying Flock cameras. He distinguished Flock devices from traditional automatic license‑plate readers, saying Flock’s internet‑connected systems and behavioral‑patterning AI create new privacy risks and potential for real‑time tracking. “Anything can be hacked,” he said, arguing that the systems’ connectivity and pattern analysis make them more powerful and therefore a greater security target.
Sundance requested further collaboration and encouraged officials to consider differences between ALPRs and Flock systems before proceeding.
Separately, retired resident Tom questioned why six township firefighters live in Ohio and suggested the township consider residency requirements for public‑safety staff. Officials and the solicitor said residency rules are generally a management or bargaining matter and not presently addressed in the contract; adding a residency requirement could be proposed going forward but would likely involve bargaining or administrative policy changes.
Supervisors thanked the commenters and noted staffing and recruitment challenges; no policy changes were made at the meeting.
